1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up/a> or Log In

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

McGinn on impact of this year's picks

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by JBlood, May 15, 2014.

  1. JBlood
    Offline

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,133
    Ratings:
    +708 / 17 / -0
    "If forced to take a premature position, my guess would be that the Packers won't gain much game-changing impact from their nine-man draft class this season and will realize only a modest amount when the final tally is made a decade from now." http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_25745282/green-bay-packers-rookie-class-wont-have-much

    This in spite of 3 picks given 8s or 9s out of a maximum of 10 points designed to gauge a "player's chance to really contribute as a rookie and the second number is his chance to really contribute during his career in Green Bay". The majority of the information he bases this on is "countless interviews with general managers, personnel directors, scouting directors and area scouts in the last five months".

    Maybe "game changing impact" differs from "really contribute" in his scale, but if we get play from 3 of the picks that "really contribute" this year and during the careers, I would call the draft a success.

    I really wonder how this guy thinks.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. easyk83
    Offline

    easyk83 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    Messages:
    582
    Ratings:
    +230 / 25 / -3
    Packer Fan Since:
    1990
    I think McGinn's trouble is that he's always preaches on these anonymous GMs and scouts. Trouble is that these guys havent been very reliable in the past, not much more so than the average Packer fan.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. JBlood
    Offline

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,133
    Ratings:
    +708 / 17 / -0
    His preaching is based on outside "experts", but his conclusions don't always fit the experts' opinions--as shown in this column. So I guess his conclusions are based on his own expertise. I will say that he's right by admitting that time will tell on this group of draft picks, just as any other group.
  4. ExpatPacker
    Offline

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,070
    Location:
    A Galaxy Far, Far Away
    Ratings:
    +388 / 7 / -0
    Listening to McGinn's latest podcast it's obvious that he thinks that a) Shazier and Pryor and Mosley were the impact picks, and that Clinton-Dix is ok, but he's not enough of a hitter like Pryor is, nor like Deonne Buccanon whom he probably liked the most of all the safeties, and b) badassness and speed are what he thinks will make the difference, and neither Dix nor Adams have enough of that.

    He just doesn't think much of any of our other picks in terms of having an impact.

    Whatever you say about McGinn, his perspective is pretty clear: he thinks that the Packers lack speed and toughness, especially on defense, and he doesn't see how that's been helped much by this draft. And I do have to give him credit for his assessment of Packer draftees in years past. He wasn't very thrilled about the Perry and Worthy picks because both of them, especially Worthy, did not display a high motor, and Worthy especially took plays off. I don't remember what he said about Datone Jones, but I don't recall him being that enthused.

    So he's been right enough that you can't ignore him, and a lot of the info he uses comes from talking to scouts. I'm not sure I agree with him this time around.

    One interesting point he made was about TT's view that big hitting safeties are not the way to go because they end up getting injured, and in the modern NFL, they end up getting penalized. This was TT's way of putting Dix over Pryor. McGinn questioned this, citing Seattle's badass boys in the secondary as an example. At least he's not a TT fanboi, but whether or not he's representing TT's view accurately or not, I can't say.
    Last edited: May 15, 2014
    • Like Like x 1
  5. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,782
    Ratings:
    +1,918 / 49 / -33
    IMO McGinn’s bias is not to appear to be a Packers fan and I appreciate journalists that at least attempt to be objective - although no one can be completely objective. And I believe he relates information he gleans from his NFL sources accurately (BTW, I’m not sure why the verb “preaches” is used in this context). IMO that information is what makes McGinn particularly valuable in covering the Packers. OTOH average Packers fans are, by definition, subjective in their view of the Packers (not that there’s anything wrong with that). McGinn’s information from NFL personnel, particularly that information gathered before the draft is IMO much more objective and agenda-free than the opinions of Packers fans. I also think the opinions of NFL personnel people are much more informed than those of the "experts" and of course of fans.

    McGinn does qualify his analysis of the Packers draft by writing, "If forced to take a premature position, my guess would be…" He doesn’t make it clear if he is assigning the number grades or if they are the average of the personnel people he spoke with. Either way, I found those scores to be confusing and contradictory. As to his overall early analysis of the draft class:
    Those are all facts that certainly may be viewed in a negative light. They may or may not significantly impact how this draft is graded 3+ years from now.

    I, along with many draft “experts” am much higher on the prospects of this draft class. For example, I think since both Clinton-Dix and Adams have acceptable speed for their positions, instincts in the former and strength, hands and leaping ability in the latter will make up for lack of elite speed. But I’m a biased Packers fan…
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. ExpatPacker
    Offline

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,070
    Location:
    A Galaxy Far, Far Away
    Ratings:
    +388 / 7 / -0
    I would also add to what you wrote that McGinn did not fault the Packers for not finding an ILB. In response to many fans, his point was, in support of TT's drafting practices, that after Mosley and Shazier the drop-off was way too far to warrant even a mid-round pick for what was on the board.
  7. JBlood
    Offline

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,133
    Ratings:
    +708 / 17 / -0
    I'm sure McGinn considers himself informed and perfectly objective; but there's nothing more subjective than rating someone as an 8 or a 9, and then state they'll likely have no impact. At best, McGinn is illogical. At worst he's intellectually dishonest. Funny, my Dad used to get furious over a St. Paul writer's rants on the Packers in the 60s and now I'm following in his footsteps.....which isn't bad.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. easyk83
    Offline

    easyk83 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    Messages:
    582
    Ratings:
    +230 / 25 / -3
    Packer Fan Since:
    1990
    I wouldnt necessarily assume that McGinn's outside analysts are agenda free. Some of them are bound to be affected by their own biases and might be inclined to magnify the perceived flaws or shortcomings of the personnel playing for a rival team. Scouts and personnel men tend to be cocksure and headstrong. Most won't want to admit that some other team has better players than they do.

    With McGinn, while I think that he's a very good sports journalist, I've noticed in the past that he picks up the same sorts of preferences and biases as many fans do. His guy he'll defend even if they stink like Walden, or if he doesn't like a player that player will never improve his stock in McGinn's eyes, Ryan Grant.
    Last edited: May 15, 2014
  9. Joe Nor Cal Packer
    Offline

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Danville, California
    Ratings:
    +11 / 3 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1960
    Not so crazy about McGinn's assessment but you also make some good points re: Worthy, Perry and Datone Jones. They have been non-factors. I would have preferred Shazier or Mosley, but they were gone. In a way TT was fortunate that Clinton-Dix was available, and we have the Bears to thank for that. As far as Clinton-Dix versus Pryor - at this point it's a toss up. If Clinton-Dix can become the QB of the defense, as he was in Alabama, hiscontributions will go well beyong his stats.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Vrill
    Offline

    Vrill Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2011
    Messages:
    194
    Ratings:
    +70 / 1 / -0
    Fact is, nobody knows how good our draft will be. It could end up being the best draft in Packers history or the worst draft in Packers history.

    McGinn has no clue just like the rest of us.

    Only time will tell.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,782
    Ratings:
    +1,918 / 49 / -33
    This has some merit but I posted, "McGinn’s information from NFL personnel, particularly that information gathered before the draft is IMO much more objective and agenda-free than the opinions of Packers fans." It's agenda-free because at the time McGinn talks to them no one knows which NFL team will draft them. McGinn gathers a lot of information on potential draftees before the draft in his 'Draft Series'. For example, he begins his preview of DB draftees with, "Of the top 10 safeties in the National Football League draft, the two players widely regarded as the best also are the two slowest." He goes on to quote personnel people basically saying there isn't an elite safety in the draft.
  12. toolkien
    Offline

    toolkien Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Messages:
    88
    Ratings:
    +56 / 1 / -6
    You work with what you've got.

    I did a quick comparison between the Packers intrinsic draft strength (based on Jimmy Johnson's draft value chart http://www.pro-football-reference.com/draft/draft_trade_value.htm) - which was 20th - and ranked the value assigned by ESPN to the Packers' actual picks - which was 10th best. If TT had bundled up some his picks to move up X number of slots - to get one of McGinn's preferred "impact players" - the overall draft value probably would have been lower. What it comes down to is the Packers need to be f#(&!^$ healthy one of these years. Trading up for one impact player when you might have 16 guys on IR isn't going to make much difference, and IF the Packers can stay healthy, they more than certainly can win a championship with what they've got and what they've drafted.
  13. Joe Nor Cal Packer
    Offline

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Danville, California
    Ratings:
    +11 / 3 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1960
    Out of all the comments on this thread, this is the one that makes the most sense. Of course then guys like McGinn would be out of work and we'd have one less so-called authority figure to slam!

    Time will tell, that's the truth. Hawk was supposed to be an "impact" player as well. He's an ok ILB, he stays healthy, he doesn't make many mistakes, but with the wisdom of time, he never would have been a top ten draft pick.
  14. Dylan Hoppe
    Offline

    Dylan Hoppe Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2013
    Messages:
    454
    Ratings:
    +70 / 5 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1994
    If we had a "veteran" draft, with all the LBs within a year or 2 of hawks age, I'd slot him in the third. Wayyyy off topic, just thought I'd throw that out there.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  15. Dylan Hoppe
    Offline

    Dylan Hoppe Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2013
    Messages:
    454
    Ratings:
    +70 / 5 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1994

    Okay that didn't make sense because there's not enough of them. So metaphorically I'd call him a 3rd round talent.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  16. Joe Nor Cal Packer
    Offline

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Danville, California
    Ratings:
    +11 / 3 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1960
    Yeah we've shifted to Hawk but you're right. On other playoff-caliber teams he's 2nd or 3rd on the depth chart.
  17. El Guapo
    Offline

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,901
    Location:
    Land 'O Lakes
    Ratings:
    +1,052 / 47 / -2
    Packer Fan Since:
    1976
    From a position-perspective, Clinton-Dix has the best chance of being an impact player. From a player-perspective, it seems to me that Abbrederis has the best chance to be an impact player. I'm just hoping that the rest turn into solid contributors. If one turns into a Clay Matthews....all the better
  18. HardRightEdge
    Offline

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,070
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings:
    +1,313 / 65 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    In answer to the OP questions raised, I think McGinn's opinions and rankings are relatively clear.

    A guy with "game changing impact" I take to mean a guy who is a play-maker, an eventual Pro Bowl-caliber player, a guy opponents game plan for, one of the 3 or so guys on either side of the ball you'd consider the core players around whom everything else is built.

    In contrast, a guy who is expected to merely "really contribute" longer term, such as HCD, would in McGinn's words, be a guy one would expect to be "a solid starter on a Super Bowl team".

    Though he does not explain it, I interpret his "really contribute" as a rookie to be a lower bar than "really contribute" longer term...judging from the text it does not appear that he implied, for example, that Adams has an 80% chance or Thornton having a 50% chance of being a "solid starter" as a rookie. The rookie number I would take to indicate the guy's potential as a solid rotational player who gets a meaningful number of snaps in his first year.

    I can't say I disagree with McGinn by and large. HDC and Adams should be a solid starter-caliber players by year 2; if HDC puts up a solid, relatively mistake-free rookie year that would be a plus.
  19. captainWIMM
    Offline

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    2,458
    Ratings:
    +779 / 32 / -8
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    I think ratings like that don´t make any sense as nobody has any idea about how a player will work out in the NFL. I expect Clinton-Dix to be the guy providing the most impact in 2014 cause he will probably be the only guy started at a position of need.

    It´s possbile Rodgers and Linsley will have some impact as well, don´t expect a lot out of the others during their rookie season though.
  20. Joe Nor Cal Packer
    Offline

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Danville, California
    Ratings:
    +11 / 3 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1960
    I think you're right about Abbrederis but it will take a few years. I expect Adams to get a lot of snaps right away. If Nelson and Cobb are resigned, there are only so many snaps. Then again, it's not unusual for 10 or 11 different guys to have a catch in a game. That will work for Abbrederis if he takes advantage of his early chances.
  21. rodell330
    Offline

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,451
    Location:
    Canton, Ohio
    Ratings:
    +832 / 175 / -43
    Packer Fan Since:
    1990
    I don't care who it is! Someone from this draft class better make an inpact. I'd prefer it be a guy on defense but you never know.
  22. Einstein McFly
    Offline

    Einstein McFly Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    286
    Ratings:
    +177 / 9 / -1
    Packer Fan Since:
    1988
    LOL, no. A lot of fans would like to think this, but it's just not so. They're either way too big a fans or know way too little about football. McGinn gets outside opinions from experts; what more would you ask of a guy? There are plenty of reporters who try to write whole articles based on the NOTHING that the coaches and GMs say at press conferences. Reading those is a total waste of time.
  23. Einstein McFly
    Offline

    Einstein McFly Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    286
    Ratings:
    +177 / 9 / -1
    Packer Fan Since:
    1988
    Of those three, the one who has had the most chances and shown the least IMO is Worthy. He was on the field a lot his rookie season and didn't do anything. Perry has been injured a lot but did have some really nice games this last year when he was healthy. Jones lost snaps last year because he couldn't hold up against the run, but neither could any of the other dlineman. Of the three I think he has the best chance to be a really nice surprise this year.
  24. captainWIMM
    Offline

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    2,458
    Ratings:
    +779 / 32 / -8
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    Worthy was a disappointment during his rookie season but neither Perry nor Jones have shown much more than him.

    Nevertheless I still think all of them could still turn into impact players for the team, still too early to call to write them off.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. Einstein McFly
    Offline

    Einstein McFly Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    286
    Ratings:
    +177 / 9 / -1
    Packer Fan Since:
    1988
    Oh, for sure. Worthy for one always seemed to have a good amount of baby fat on him and I wonder what he'd look like after a few years in an NFL weight room. Still, his big thing in college was his quick first step and his ability to guess the snap count, so I'm still waiting to see if/how that works out for him in the NFL. Considering that Thornton seems like a similar player but without the "taking plays off" bit and that Boyd is someone they really liked last year, I hope he's ready to fight for a roster spot.

Share This Page