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<1234>»
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline greengold  
#11 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 6:16:46 PM(UTC)
greengold

Rank: 7th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 5/11/2013(UTC)

Applause Given: 28
Applause Received: 7

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
The percent of first and even 2nd round busts is a fraction of the number of 6th and 7th round picks that fail to make a significant contribution.
So is your argument really sign low round picks because when they fail they won't take up very much cap space?


That's not what I'm saying at all. All I'm saying is that late round picks aren't as worthless as some make them out to be. And you get extra late round picks by trading back just a few spots in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd rounds.

I'm not even sure what the original point was. I think someone was ragging on Ted Thompson for having so many late round picks. He has gone the opposite way before, traded away late picks to move up a few spots to grab an impact player. Isn't that how they got Clay Matthews III?


Offline texaspackerbacker  
#12 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 6:25:07 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2014

United States
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 481
Applause Received: 292

Originally Posted by: steveishere Go to Quoted Post
It's been a whole 2 seasons since they won the Superbowl. That's not exactly failing. Sometimes shit just doesn't go your way. This is consistently one of the top teams in the league. That's really all you can ask for. There's a hell of a lot more that goes into winning the Superbowl than how many high round picks are on your team.


When I read the thread title, this is the first thing that popped into my head also - that and the idea that there are a whole array of reasons for the playoff losses, not the least of which is other teams playing really really good - Kaepernick, etc. I would also suggest injuries have something to do with the way things have gone, although the Super Bowl win was the worst of all in that way.

If Thompson was a little bit more hung up on his tendency to trade down and add 6th and 7th round picks, I'd maybe be upset about it too, but he has occasionally traded up or traded down to other rounds, etc. On a case by case basis, it's hard to argue a pattern of badness. The decision apparently either was triggered by not having an obvious pick on the board at the time or having somebody give him a deal to good to refuse.

The better question maybe would be, is Thompson's percentage of hits v. misses in the 6th and 7th better or worse than the league in general. My gut feeling is better.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Offline nerdmann  
#13 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 6:31:44 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,706
Applause Received: 664

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post
You really think the Packers could match the 49ers regardless of that punt turnover?


The muffed punt was a backbreaker.

I do not fear the 49ers. Are they for real? I believe so. But so are we.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline nerdmann  
#14 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 6:33:17 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,706
Applause Received: 664

Originally Posted by: steveishere Go to Quoted Post
It's been a whole 2 seasons since they won the Superbowl. That's not exactly failing. Sometimes shit just doesn't go your way. This is consistently one of the top teams in the league. That's really all you can ask for. There's a hell of a lot more that goes into winning the Superbowl than how many high round picks are on your team.


Keep in mind also that we had some key injuries last year. 2013 is an odd numbered year, so with any luck the pattern will hold, and we'll stay relatively healthy.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline OlHoss1884  
#15 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 6:41:42 PM(UTC)
OlHoss1884

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 5/8/2013(UTC)
Location: Waukegan, IL

Applause Given: 60
Applause Received: 167

Ultimately, most draft picks turn out to be "busts" as the average career is 3.5 years. The teams that draft the best will manage 3 or 4 picks per draft which turn into starters/regulars, which the Packers have done consistently for a decade. Compare that to their divisional opponents. Where someone is drafted can create different levels of expectations, but for all rookies it becomes a matter of whether they develop into quality NFL players. Sometimes that's a high round pick like A-Rod, sometimes it's a low round pick like Brady. Since there are a lot of factors (including injuries) that are beyond the team's control or beyond what the scouts can predict, any draft pick is a gamblee, to an extent, but the better teams will consistently make better picks and develop better players from their draft.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" --Albert Einstein
Offline wpr  
#16 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 6:59:40 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: 1,518

Originally Posted by: greengold Go to Quoted Post
That's not what I'm saying at all. All I'm saying is that late round picks aren't as worthless as some make them out to be. And you get extra late round picks by trading back just a few spots in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd rounds.

I'm not even sure what the original point was. I think someone was ragging on Ted Thompson for having so many late round picks. He has gone the opposite way before, traded away late picks to move up a few spots to grab an impact player. Isn't that how they got Clay Matthews III?




see THAT is the point. Get rid of the more or less useless low round picks and spend them on quality higher round picks. You get so much more value with higher picks. You get what you pay for.
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Offline texaspackerbacker  
#17 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 7:09:11 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2014

United States
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 481
Applause Received: 292

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
see THAT is the point. Get rid of the more or less useless low round picks and spend them on quality higher round picks. You get so much more value with higher picks. You get what you pay for.


yeah but ......... hahaha.

If you could count on ALWAYS getting a CMIII, your logic flies. But as was said early on in the thread, Ted Thompson figures the percentages lie with quantity. Who are we mere mortals to argue hahaha?
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Offline wpr  
#18 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 7:14:10 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: 1,518

I did a quick check on Baltimore. The Super Bowl roster was only 37% 6th 7th round picks along with undrafted free agents. They also had 59% of the starting lineup that were 1st (7) or 2nd (6) round picks. GB had 6 firsts and 2 second or 36%. (That included Bulaga) If you add Benson, Sherrod and Perry they would have been 50%.

Someone else can check on SF. Point is the team who won the SB had better quality players across the board on their roster than GB did. Sure it is nice when an UDFA like Williams or Shields works hard and becomes the starting CB. But the Ed Reeds of the world have a better track record of success.
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Offline steveishere  
#19 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 7:15:21 PM(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: wpr Go to Quoted Post
see THAT is the point. Get rid of the more or less useless low round picks and spend them on quality higher round picks. You get so much more value with higher picks. You get what you pay for.


It doesn't work like that though. Ted Thompson isn't sitting there simply going "man I just want more picks even though there's some great players on the board, I'll just trade back anyways" If the players aren't there to get you cannot get them simple as that. Ted Thompson trusts the board and the scouts/evaluators. If the board says there's a bunch of guys of the same quality and no standout players then he's going to trade back and get one of those same quality players and add more chances late in the draft.

He's shown that if there's a significant player to trade up for he WILL do it so you cannot really claim he's avoiding that situation. You don't just trade up to get a player because "higher round picks have a better chance to work out" if your board doesn't say those players are worth it. On top of that each draft is different. Just because one year had a bunch of studs in the 2nd round doesn't mean the next year every 2nd rounder will be a stud ( they may all be a bust).
Offline wpr  
#20 Posted : Thursday, May 16, 2013 7:18:04 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: 1,518

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker Go to Quoted Post
yeah but ......... hahaha.

If you could count on ALWAYS getting a CMIII, your logic flies. But as was said early on in the thread, Ted Thompson figures the percentages lie with quantity. Who are we mere mortals to argue hahaha?


You don't always get CM III. You just get a better chance of finding him in the higher rounds not in the 6th or 7th.
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages<1234>»
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
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / hardrocker950

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / The_Green_Ninja

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Tezzy

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

23-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

23-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

23-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / porky88