Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Would you lose your mind?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 552755"><p>We are more in a agreement than disagreement.</p><p></p><p>However, I don't think you can judge whether a pick skewed to need or best player available based on trade-up vs. stand pat.</p><p></p><p>First, one does not know if Thompson tried to trade up in a particular circumstance but couldn't get a deal done.</p><p></p><p>Second, I don't think a trade up on it's face necessarily skews to a "need" objective being filled whereas sitting tight skews to a BPA pick.</p><p></p><p>In the case of Perry, we should recall that the need list was long, as evidenced by the nascent defensive rebuilding evidenced in that draft even if subsequent injuries and non-performance clouds that fact. I think we can agree that all-defense draft did not arise from Thompson, as he put it, losing his mind.</p><p></p><p>At the 18th. pick, Ingram, McClellin, Hightower, Mercilus and Perry were still on the board. These guys represent a mix of 3-4 OLB and ILB projections. Walden and Hawk had stunk up the ball yard in 2011. We can imagine a scenario whereby Thompson valued two or more or these players more or less equally on both the need and value scale. So long as that is the case and multiple options are still on the board, there's no urgency to trade up.</p><p></p><p>In fact, Hightower, Mercilus and Perry were all still on the board at Pick 25.</p><p></p><p>So, it is not hard to envision a scenario whereby (1) Thompson had OLB and ILB high on the needs list, (2) saw a bunch of satisfactory options that represented adequate value, and (3) saw no need to trade up since those multiple satisfactory options "came to him", to use Thompson's phraseology.</p><p></p><p>Or for all we know, between Perry and Mercilus, the latter (taken immediaetly before our pick) may have been Thompson's better value by some margin.</p><p></p><p>Conversely, in the case of Worthy, one can envision a scenario where Thompson considered him the best value on the board at pick 40, saw increasing value as he dropped, and was able to secure, in his mind, uncommon value at 51. It's that 20/20 hindsight thing again...many would like to think Thompson would not have strained himself to secure Worthy as a need-skewed pick as opposed to an uncommon value. But there is no reason to believe that was not case.</p><p></p><p>Whether you brought "best player available" terminology to this board I could not say (that would have predated my time here), however that phraseology has long been in the Thompson lexicon, repeated once again this past week, again without varnish or qualification.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 552755"] We are more in a agreement than disagreement. However, I don't think you can judge whether a pick skewed to need or best player available based on trade-up vs. stand pat. First, one does not know if Thompson tried to trade up in a particular circumstance but couldn't get a deal done. Second, I don't think a trade up on it's face necessarily skews to a "need" objective being filled whereas sitting tight skews to a BPA pick. In the case of Perry, we should recall that the need list was long, as evidenced by the nascent defensive rebuilding evidenced in that draft even if subsequent injuries and non-performance clouds that fact. I think we can agree that all-defense draft did not arise from Thompson, as he put it, losing his mind. At the 18th. pick, Ingram, McClellin, Hightower, Mercilus and Perry were still on the board. These guys represent a mix of 3-4 OLB and ILB projections. Walden and Hawk had stunk up the ball yard in 2011. We can imagine a scenario whereby Thompson valued two or more or these players more or less equally on both the need and value scale. So long as that is the case and multiple options are still on the board, there's no urgency to trade up. In fact, Hightower, Mercilus and Perry were all still on the board at Pick 25. So, it is not hard to envision a scenario whereby (1) Thompson had OLB and ILB high on the needs list, (2) saw a bunch of satisfactory options that represented adequate value, and (3) saw no need to trade up since those multiple satisfactory options "came to him", to use Thompson's phraseology. Or for all we know, between Perry and Mercilus, the latter (taken immediaetly before our pick) may have been Thompson's better value by some margin. Conversely, in the case of Worthy, one can envision a scenario where Thompson considered him the best value on the board at pick 40, saw increasing value as he dropped, and was able to secure, in his mind, uncommon value at 51. It's that 20/20 hindsight thing again...many would like to think Thompson would not have strained himself to secure Worthy as a need-skewed pick as opposed to an uncommon value. But there is no reason to believe that was not case. Whether you brought "best player available" terminology to this board I could not say (that would have predated my time here), however that phraseology has long been in the Thompson lexicon, repeated once again this past week, again without varnish or qualification. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
DoURant
Raleigh NC Packers Fan
GreenBaySlacker
Green_Bay_Packers
Pkrjones
Latest posts
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
3 minutes ago
Draft Talk
G
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: GreenBaySlacker
3 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Not too soon 2024 roster prediction
Latest: Sanguine camper
19 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 7, pick 245: Michael Pratt, QB
Latest: DoURant
22 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: DoURant
29 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Would you lose your mind?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top