2022 Draft Grades

[sschind]

I like the way Chad Reuter (nfl.com) puts it regarding immediate post-draft grades.



(FWIW, he gave us an "A" for Day One, "A-" for Day Two, and "A" for Day Three, with an overall grade of "A")

If you look at most post draft grades you will see that the majority of teams are getting A and B grades with a few C's and hardly any D's or F's. The reason is because in most cases they either drafted great athletes, filled huge needs (preferably with at least decent talent) or got extremely good value. These grades are based on college performance obviously but also on how the players perceived fit with the teams current situation based on that talent, need and value. These grades are not necessarily predictions of what the player will do although in many cases very high expectations can factor in. Unless a GM total messes up they are given a huge benefit of the doubt. Since we have no way of knowing how well a player will pan out most evaluators tend to look at the positives for most picks and assume if not best case scenario at least some degree of success based on college career and perceived fit with the team. Those who focus on stuff like "the Packers needed a WR and they didn't trade up to get one in round 1 so their draft sucks" are incredibly myopic. They are ignoring the big picture and focusing on one small aspect. In three years when we can "really judge" a draft class we are judging them on how they performed at the pro level thus far. Not only does a day after grade provide a base line as Reuter says, it is based on totally different criteria.

Of course there will always be a degree of personal bias as well. Chris Simms had Watson rated as his #2 WR in the draft. His grade of the Packers draft or at least the Watson pick, will likely be higher than someone who thought he may have been borderline 2nd round talent.

Pretty much every one of the lower Packers grades I have seen cites not drafting a WR in the 1st round and that's about it. Its all about what they didn't do rather than what they did. If they do mention Watson its usually with the caveat that he came from a smaller school and could turn out to be a star in a few years. I'm going to go out on a limb and make my bold prediction for the season. Christian Watson will have better stats than at least 2 of the WRs drafted ahead of him. That may not be much but when you consider how many people think it was a huge mistake to pass on one of the top 4 (London, Olave, Wilson and Williams) to me its saying a lot.

 

[lambeaulambo]

Incomplete. We have no idea how good or bad this draft is for at least a couple of years and more like three.

but u can offer your opinion...lol

 

[Raleigh NC Packers Fan]

Is there really room to sign a veteran WR? Watson, Rodgers, Doubs, Lazard (is he signed?) are locks with Cobb and Watkins almost so. A veteran would be competing with the last two for a spot. Not counting the wannabees that were on the practice squad last season and the last draft pick Toure.

Not sure, what is the most receivers a team could take into the regular season? 7? I won't really feel confident about our receivers, at least in terms of it being good enough to win a super bowl, because of the loss of Adams, unless we sign a good veteran.

The competition couldn't hurt also.

 

[milani]

It pained me to see Likely chosen 1 selection before we picked. Although I don’t think they were thinking TE in hindsight.

That is a position that’s not super expensive to work a trade or acquisition etc.. I really feel like we’re 1 more stellar pass catching TE away from being really prolific on Offense. Someone like Cook in his prime etc. Maybe just maybe.. they feel like we’ve got a group of Big Receivers that serve a similar purpose idk. What was the smallest Receiver, like 6’2” 200

Yes. But it is more than being a big wideout. A TE blocks in the run game and sometimes has to power a LB for that yard to get the first down. And sometimes catch it amidst a crowd battling in the end zone.

 

[OldSchool101]

I voted B because there was not a B+ option.

That’s exactly where I was also. “Loved” the picks. Only “liked” or “appreciated” the capital used.

A- for me if we at least netted a 4th Rounder in the Watson trade.

A for me if we had traded #22 back to 25-27 range and gotten a 4th rounder. The Ravens had 4 separate 4th round selections to work a deal. I still think 85% Quay Walker is there in that 25-29 range.

That would’ve given us 1 Safety
and 1 CB plus still got Doubs and Tom

 

[Spanky]

but u can offer your opinion...lol

Sure. And I can tell you what I think the weather will be three months from now but it likely wouldn't be accurate or of any value. I just shake my head when people grade drafts. It's impossible to know until the players play for a couple of years.

Does anyone know of any websites that grade the draft graders 3-4 years after the fact? Those are the grades I'd like to see.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Unless he is traded for a #3 caliber safety or another TE to throw in the mix, I expect Rodger's to be on the team before Cobb or Sammy.

As I mentioned in another thread the Packers moving on from Cobb would result in an additional cap hit. That's not going to happen.

Day1 - me happy
Day- 2 me shaking my head
Day - 3 me even happier

Please tell me why you didn't like day 2 of the draft???

Not sure, what is the most receivers a team could take into the regular season? 7?

The Packers could keep up to 53 wide receivers on the active roster. That might have a negative effect on their performance on defense though.

 

[sschind]

The Packers could keep up to 53 wide receivers on the active roster. That might have a negative effect on their performance on defense though.

I don't think it would help the offense much either. Even if they were 53 Davante Adams level guys.

Probably wouldn't have much impact on special teams performance though.

 

[Schultz]

As I mentioned in another thread the Packers moving on from Cobb would result in an additional cap hit. That's not going to happen.



Please tell me why you didn't like day 2 of the draft???



The Packers could keep up to 53 wide receivers on the active roster. That might have a negative effect on their performance on defense though.

I thought they gave up too much in the trade. IMO (which I by no means think is better than Gute & Company) there were still going to be receivers at 53 in the same tier as Watson. This forum is for our own opinions, even if we are sane enough to realize that the guys who do it for a living are 10x more likely to get it right.

 

[OldSchool101]

I don’t see drafting tight ends as that valuable. Unless you can draft an elite prospect (which this draft didn’t have) rookie tight ends don’t produce. I’m more a believer in signing another team’s disappointing tight end coming off his rookie deal. The VAST majority of rookie tight ends aren’t any good until their second contract.

Another big part of that lack of 1st season production is usage. The VAST majority of teams dont give a Rookie TE a substantial workload and for good reason. They want to ease players into their roles by testing them so they can evaluate strengths and weaknesses.
Jimmy Graham is a good example. He had 1 partial year of college production after playing basketball. Then he absolutely lit up the NFL when paired with a good QB.
Graham was nowhere near his second contract before he was embarrassing defenses.

You’re talking in generalities when saying a TE needs a 2nd contract to be get production and maybe in that respect.. what you are saying is accurate.
Yet Paired with a HOF QB and having a chance to take a lead role year 1 because of Tonyan coming off injury and a plethora of new guys? Totally different story, so I respectfully disagree. Just look at Mark Andrews, he comes in year 1 and makes an impact and by year 2 he’s a staple of the Offense. That’s what a good QB will do.

btw. The Ravens didn’t bat a Wing taking Isaiah Likely and they already had Andrews locked through 2025. The Packers don’t have anyone near a Mark Andrews at TE and that’s a concern with lack of ideal (call it untested) WR targets and Tonyan coming off an ACL. Nothing personal, and I’m generally optimistic, but we needed a better plan than Deguara

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Another big part of that lack of 1st season production is usage. The VAST majority of teams dont give a Rookie TE a substantial workload and for good reason. They want to ease players into their roles by testing them so they can evaluate strengths and weaknesses.
Jimmy Graham is a good example. He had 1 partial year of college production after playing basketball. Then he absolutely lit up the NFL when paired with a good QB.
Graham was nowhere near his second contract before he was embarrassing defenses.

You’re talking in generalities when saying a TE needs a 2nd contract to be get production and maybe in that respect.. what you are saying is accurate.
Yet Paired with a HOF QB and having a chance to take a lead role year 1 because of Tonyan coming off injury and a plethora of new guys? Totally different story, so I respectfully disagree. Just look at Mark Andrews, he comes in year 1 and makes an impact and by year 2 he’s a staple of the Offense. That’s what a good QB will do.

btw. The Ravens didn’t bat a Wing taking Isaiah Likely and they already had Andrews locked through 2025. The Packers don’t have anyone near a Mark Andrews at TE and that’s a concern with lack of ideal (call it untested) WR targets and Tonyan coming off an ACL. Nothing personal, and I’m generally optimistic, but we needed a better plan than Deguara

I'd rather sign an upside guy on a second deal than draft a rookie unless said rookie is an exceptional prospect. Yes, you are correct, the occasional anecdotal tight end can be an exceptional prospect. This draft had none of those.

 

[realitybytez]

pete priscoe says:

Green Bay Packers: B+​

Best Pick: First-round linebacker Quay Walker is a playmaker who will really add speed to their defense. I know fans probably wanted a receiver, but Walker is a heck of a player who pay off in a big way.

Worst Pick: I didn't like the trade up for receiver Christian Watson. I know they need help, but I think there were better options.

The Skinny: They hit big with their first two picks in Walker and defensive tackle Devonte Wyatt. Most wanted at least one receiver there, but they held true to their board. They traded up to get Watson, but I think there were better options. I love fourth-round tackle Zach Tom.

 

[OldSchool101]

I'd rather sign an upside guy on a second deal than draft a rookie unless said rookie is an exceptional prospect. Yes, you are correct, the occasional anecdotal tight end can be an exceptional prospect. This draft had none of those.

Jelani was our best realistic shot in later Day 2, but He went kinda high..I thought he Woods (I’m feeling happy so sorry!)
10.0 RAS TE’s don’t come down the pike everyday my friend. I promise you pair him with Rodgers and if they get any sort of mojo! You got a young Gronki

With Herbert under Linsley (sounds so wrong ) let’s just see if it takes Woods his 5th season.

 

[sschind]

Some people downgrade the trade up to get Watson saying it was too much to give up. I understand the trade up and the pick are tied together but try looking at it this way. What if the #34 pick was our original pick and we didn't have the two late round second picks. Would that make any difference in your grade if we had taken Watson then. In other words is it Watson you don't like here or giving up the two draft picks. Just curious

 

[Magooch]

Some people downgrade the trade up to get Watson saying it was too much to give up. I understand the trade up and the pick are tied together but try looking at it this way. What if the #34 pick was our original pick and we didn't have the two late round second picks. Would that make any difference in your grade if we had taken Watson then. In other words is it Watson you don't like here or giving up the two draft picks. Just curious

I think I've mentioned it before but it sounds like if Wyatt wasn't still there at 28 then they would've taken Watson with that pick. Don't remember the exact quote but Gute more or less said they were surprised that he was still available at 28 and that's why he ended up being taken there (i.e. they'd graded him higher/expected him gone earlier) and the value was too good to pass up. But if he'd gone when they expected I think they take Watson at 28.

So with that in mind I think that changes things a little bit. Trading 53+59 for 34 (an early 2nd) feels like a worse deal than trading 53+59 for 28 (a late 1st). And that balances it out a lot better in most pick trade value models too.

By the older "Jimmy Johnson" model, 53+59 is worth 680 points while 34 is worth 560 points, so that's 120 points in the favor of the Vikings, i.e. we "lost" the trade by 120 points of value. But the 28th pick is worth 660 points, so it's nearly dead even at that point. With the newer "Rich Hill" model, 53+59 combined are worth 197 points; 34 is worth 175 points (so again, the Vikings "win" the trade there), but 28th is worth 209 points, meaning by the Rich Hill model we'd "win" that trade.

All that to say - if we really valued Watson as a first-round graded player and were willing to take him at 28, then basically you can choose between:

1. Quay Walker, Christian Watson, and picks 53+59, but no Devonte Wyatt
or 2. Quay Walker, Devonte Wyatt, and Christian Watson, but nothing else in the 2nd.

And I guess it's also the case that if we would've taken Watson in the first and graded him at that level, it's basically like choosing between two firsts and two late seconds vs three firsts and no seconds. I'd take the latter.

 

[Schultz]

I think I've mentioned it before but it sounds like if Wyatt wasn't still there at 28 then they would've taken Watson with that pick. Don't remember the exact quote but Gute more or less said they were surprised that he was still available at 28 and that's why he ended up being taken there (i.e. they'd graded him higher/expected him gone earlier) and the value was too good to pass up. But if he'd gone when they expected I think they take Watson at 28.

So with that in mind I think that changes things a little bit. Trading 53+59 for 34 (an early 2nd) feels like a worse deal than trading 53+59 for 28 (a late 1st). And that balances it out a lot better in most pick trade value models too.

By the older "Jimmy Johnson" model, 53+59 is worth 680 points while 34 is worth 560 points, so that's 120 points in the favor of the Vikings, i.e. we "lost" the trade by 120 points of value. But the 28th pick is worth 660 points, so it's nearly dead even at that point. With the newer "Rich Hill" model, 53+59 combined are worth 197 points; 34 is worth 175 points (so again, the Vikings "win" the trade there), but 28th is worth 209 points, meaning by the Rich Hill model we'd "win" that trade.

All that to say - if we really valued Watson as a first-round graded player and were willing to take him at 28, then basically you can choose between:

1. Quay Walker, Christian Watson, and picks 53+59, but no Devonte Wyatt
or 2. Quay Walker, Devonte Wyatt, and Christian Watson, but nothing else in the 2nd.

And I guess it's also the case that if we would've taken Watson in the first and graded him at that level, it's basically like choosing between two firsts and two late seconds vs three firsts and no seconds. I'd take the latter.

Good points, but if you are going to call them late seconds then you have to call them late firsts.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I thought they gave up too much in the trade. IMO (which I by no means think is better than Gute & Company) there were still going to be receivers at 53 in the same tier as Watson. This forum is for our own opinions, even if we are sane enough to realize that the guys who do it for a living are 10x more likely to get it right.

I understand the sentiment that the Packers gave up too much to trade up to #34 but I'm fine with it as it seems they considered Watson the only receiver in the top tier left.

Just look at Mark Andrews, he comes in year 1 and makes an impact and by year 2 he’s a staple of the Offense. That’s what a good QB will do.

Just imagine what Andrews would be able to do if the Ravens actually had a good quarterback.

Worst Pick: I didn't like the trade up for receiver Christian Watson. I know they need help, but I think there were better options.

Watson addresses a huge need on the roster. It might be smart to wait a bit before declaring there were better options available.

 

[realitybytez]

Watson addresses a huge need on the roster. It might be smart to wait a bit before declaring there were better options available.

i assume you are talkin to pete priscoe because i didn't make the comment that you are responding to.

 

[realitybytez]

here's an interesting take from pff: https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-projecting-most-impactful-2022-rookie-draft-classes

and here's a compilation of draft grades from a bunch of sports writers:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Poppa San]

here's an interesting take from pff: https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-projecting-most-impactful-2022-rookie-draft-classes

and here's a compilation of draft grades from a bunch of sports writers:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Can you link to the chart? I can't make out a lot of it.

 

[realitybytez]

Can you link to the chart? I can't make out a lot of it.

it was in a twitter post.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[OldSchool101]

it was in a twitter post.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Dator and Nystrom are 2 of the 3 harshest critics of that entire group as a whole unit.

I find it peculiar that Nystrom has us graded “B+“
Dator has us a “ D” grade


Out of 18 on that panel, the next rating of the top 3 most critical offenders was a C-
The only way that happens is if James Dator from SuperBowl Nation has an ongoing, pre conditioned prejudice against the Packers.

Anyway we can throw out the high and the low and we’re in the top half

 

[Poppa San]

it was in a twitter post.

Thank you. I uploaded a copy of just the picture that this forum accepts..

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

i assume you are talkin to pete priscoe because i didn't make the comment that you are responding to.

My bad, I thought it was your take you posted above.

 

[Packerbacker1996]

Dator and Nystrom are 2 of the 3 harshest critics of that entire group as a whole unit.

I find it peculiar that Nystrom has us graded “B+“
Dator has us a “ D” grade


Out of 18 on that panel, the next rating of the top 3 most critical offenders was a C-
The only way that happens is if James Dator from SuperBowl Nation has an ongoing, pre conditioned prejudice against the Packers.

Anyway we can throw out the high and the low and we’re in the top half

Based on Dator's rating I can now with full confidence ignore that moran for the rest of this lifetime.