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 or

    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!
  2. Big Announcement Coming for 2015 Football Season!!

    Be on the look out for a big Packer Forum announcement when the schedule is released. Full details coming soon...

Analysis of TT's 2005 Draft

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by TOPackerFan, Feb 1, 2007.

  1. TOPackerFan

    TOPackerFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    2,084
    Ratings:
    +0
    I know the conventional wisdom is that he's some sort of personnel/draft genius, but this doesn't look so good.

    From the jsonline:

    "Green Bay - The caveat always reads that it takes at least three seasons to evaluate a draft class in the National Football League.

    If that's the case, then it would be time to evaluate the 2004 draft class, the final year in which Mike Sherman was in charge.

    But since there are only two players left from that six-player class, there's really not enough left to evaluate.

    Defensive tackle Corey Williams and center Scott Wells are both starters. On those two, Sherman hit, and he did so in the sixth and seventh rounds.

    But on first-round pick Ahmad Carroll and third-round picks Joey Thomas, Donnell Washington and B.J. Sander, the Packers seriously flopped.

    So it's easy to call that draft a serious failure.

    But since there's so little to evaluate - and there's no sense in beating a dead horse, anyway, because Sherman has been flogged more than enough for that class - it's time to move the schedule up a little bit.

    Sherman had more critics than we can count as a draft man. The question is whether the man who replaced him is doing better.

    Ted Thompson took control of the Packer football operations in January of 2005 and handled the draft three months later.

    And because the 2004 class doesn't have enough players left around to evaluate, let's take a little skip ahead and evaluate the 2005 class.

    Thompson is a man who believes in building a team through the draft. He's not big on high-priced free agents. He'll make trades, but nobody makes blockbuster trades in the NFL anymore.

    So the draft is where Thompson figures to do his biggest work.

    And how does it look like he did in 2005?

    Sherman's philosophy seemed to be to trade up and seek quality over quantity. Thompson's philosophy seems to be the opposite. He's spent two drafts trading down to get more and more picks.

    In 2005, he ended up making 11 picks.

    In order, they were: quarterback Aaron Rodgers (first round); safety Nick Collins (second round); wide receiver Terrence Murphy (second round); safety Marviel Underwood (fourth round); linebacker Brady Poppinga (fourth round); guard Junius Coston (fifth round); cornerback Mike Hawkins (fifth round); defensive end Mike Montgomery (sixth round); wide receiver Craig Bragg (sixth round); linebacker Kurt Campbell (seventh round); and guard Will Whitticker (seventh round).

    Because it's early, the grading scale will not be complicated. The grade on each player will be either "hit" or "miss."

    So here goes:

    Rodgers: Hasn't played enough and then broke his foot this past season. He's a good kid and might pan out in the future. But this isn't elementary school any more, and in the NFL first-round picks need to be contributors by the end of Year 2. It might be harsh now, and Rodgers could end up making it a great pick in years to come. He was No. 24, not a top 5 pick. But for now? Miss.

    Collins: Pretty average for the first 28 games of his career. His last four were pretty darn good. That's not a lot to go on, but for now? Hit.

    Murphy: Looked like a good pick. Then suffered a career-threatening neck injury and the Packers uncovered a pre-existing condition that caused them to fail him on his physical. No one else picked him up. Tests for narrowing of the spinal canal should now be part of every team's pre-draft medical examination. Miss.

    Underwood: Might have taken the starting position away from Marquand Manuel at some point had he not suffered a season-ending injury in pre-season. Still might next season. It's iffy, but for a fourth-rounder . . . hit.

    Poppinga: Took a while last year to get his first start in December and then promptly tore his ACL. Then he came back this year and started all season long. Clearly a hit.

    Coston: Stayed on the roster for two years. Contributed next to nothing. Miss.

    Hawkins: The possessor of fantastic tools, Hawkins lacked the toughness to stick. Miss.

    Montgomery: Until a knee injury late in 2006 he had become a part of the defensive end rotation. Should remain so in 2007. Hit.

    Bragg: Never could stick on a team desperate for receivers and return help. That's a clear miss.

    Campbell: Two years on injured reserve. Might not have made it anyway. Miss.

    Whitticker: Started as a rookie, cut by the end of his second camp. That's probably more of a statement of how bad the Packers really were in 2005. Miss.

    Adding it up, there are seven misses and four hits. Sure, it's harsh to blame a GM for misses on sixth- and seventh-round picks.

    But on this crude scale, Thompson missed on five of his final six picks.

    Things could still change, but for now the early returns on the 2005 draft class are not what the Packers needed."

    All this really says to me is that it's hard to get even good players at the end of each round.
     
  2. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,659
    Ratings:
    +2,966
    3 were injured so they are misses by default, cant give them a hit, but shouldnt really be a miss either..

    no real way to grade those 3 out till they are on the field...

    so while on the outside it is 7 misses and 4 hits...Should it be 4 misses, 4 hits and 3 neutral or something??
     
  3. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    Isn't Whitticker starting somewhere where zoneblocking isn't used as much as the Packers?


    edit, im *** wrong on this... he's on the dolphins, as a backup
     
  4. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    First of all your 1st round pick can make or break a draft class and we simply cannot judge that pick at this time.

    As far as I am concerned I think we are better off having a 1st round QB in the wings when Favre retires than having only a career backup or whatever.

    It also bodes well for us and improves the chances of success that MM is strong in bringing young QB's along and has had the time to do so thanks to Favre staying around.

    This topic actually revolves somewhat on Favre's decision to stay the last two years and I think we all agree it's a good thing Rodgers wasn't thrown into the fire too quickly. Good for any young QB for that matter.

    Little hard to grade a draft when the top guy is sitting behind a legend.

    I suspect his "hits" in the bottom two rounds will improve over time. That's a percentage thing and I would rather he hit the first three or four rounds and miss the rest than whif in the first three. Besides, does anyone know how the '05 draft stacked up quality wise?

    I don't. But that could be part of the answer for low production in the lower rounds. Some years the cubbards pretty bare by the 6th round. This year, for example, looks pretty good for the first few rounds thanks to a bunch of Juniors coming out. After that I'm not so sure about this year.

    There's a lot more variables than simply "hit" or "miss".
     
  5. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    If Poppinga, Underwood, Collins, and Rodgers all start from that Draft Class it will be fairly successful. Whenever you pick as much as Ted Thompson does in a Draft your bound to have more misses than hits. Whether your Ron Wolf or Ted Thompson.
     
  6. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    That's a really key point porky, and as this team gets better an better, the draft will eventually produce not as many roster players as it has the past 2 seasons.

    Actually the thing with Rodgers is that I remember reading at the PG or JS (a LONG time back) that if Rodgers wasn't the choice, the Pack would've gone with CB Marlin Jackson.

    Problem is that Jackson hasn't really done anything of note (besides the INT to clinch the SB spot for the Colts) and on a team that isn't strong at CB, Marlin Jackson isn't starting. He actually got moved to FS, and was seen as a weak point starting for Bob Sanders.

    So looking at it that way, having Rodgers as a first round pick isn't a bad thing by any means.
     
  7. Raider Pride

    Raider Pride Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,868
    Ratings:
    +2
    I do not think you can call A-Rod a miss. If fact it is silly.

    A QB needs game time experience, and I give the kid an "A" for toughness just for playing with a broken foot.

    RP
     
  8. Cliff

    Cliff Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Messages:
    197
    Ratings:
    +0
    RP, you are as right as rain.
     
  9. pack_in_black

    pack_in_black Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,876
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think you've also got to take into account that this was TT's first draft ever. (I think) the 04 draft was what, Sherm's 4th?

    (sorry, I'm at work and can't get my facts straight...)
     
  10. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Good point PIB, the fact may exist that Sherman had a heavy hand in that draft, because he was still the GM and would have sent the scouting dept. to scout according to the way Sherman used to do things normally...
     
  11. Cliff

    Cliff Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Messages:
    197
    Ratings:
    +0
    Are you saying Sherman had a hand in the 2005 draft?
     
  12. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    He must have....

    Example: Will Whitticker - O-linemen designed to play man-to-man blocking...

    Last year: College, Spitz, Moll - all that would've been seen as not physically the best for the man-to-man scheme, but solid for the ZB scheme....

    Sherman must have played a part indirectly at least, if not directly. I believe TT said you can't force players on a coach (or something similar)...
     
  13. CaliforniaCheez

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0

    I don't normally disagree with you warhawk but:

    Whitticker was a better pick.
    He contributed a lot more snaps, and starts.

    Rookie Rodgers has not contributed to the team in any measurable way(he's not even a holder).
    There were several guards on the boards who could have been taken and contributed more to the team.

    40% of Rodgers first round pick contract has expired. The Packers have little return for all those dollars spent. Unless it is as a baseball cap model.

    For those saying give him a chance I ask you which exhibition game to date has he particularly distinguished himself?
    I don't recall him running a 2 minute drill effectively.

    No, the first round pick of 2005 has been very similar to the 2001 first round pick for whom Matt Hasslebeck was traded.
     
  14. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    Sherman's scheme was different than McCarthy's. Thompson drafted players for Sherman's scheme at the time which makes the most sense.
     
  15. Greg C.

    Greg C. Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    2,856
    Ratings:
    +0
    This writer should've taken his own advice and waited another year to judge that draft. We should have a much clearer picture of some of these players after this year. With Rodgers, we might have to wait even longer. Expecting him to "contribute" as Brett Favre's backup is absurd.

    To answer CaliforniaCheeze's question, Rodgers distinguished himself very well in the first two exhibition games of the 2006 season, against San Diego and Atlanta. He looked very sharp in those games. Unfortunately, he cooled off in the next two games, and obviously didn't do squat in his one regular season appearance. So the jury is still out on him. But he should get credit where credit is due for those first two exhibition games.
     
  16. CaliforniaCheez

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    Thank you for reminding me of those major contributions. I disagree on the San Diego game but I did enjoy the Atlanta game.

    The guy was not a good selection. Not because he is who he is but he is not a good fit for the Packers.

    Craig Nall was better on the clipboard for a lot less.
     
  17. millertime

    millertime Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    841
    Ratings:
    +0
    Look at the guys picked after rodgers? Who would you rather have instead?

    24 Green Bay Aaron Rodgers - QB
    25 Washington Jason Campbell - QB
    26 Seattle Chris Spencer - OC
    27 Atlanta Roddy White - WR
    28 San Diego Luis Castillo - DT
    29 Indianapolis Marlin Jackson - CB
    30 Pittsburgh Heath Miller - TE
    31 Philadelphia Mike Patterson - DT
    32 New England Logan Mankins - OG

    The only ones on there that I would rather have are Heath Miller and Luis Castillo. Roddy White? Marlin Jackson? C'mon

    Is Rodgers the future? NO ONE KNOWS!!! You can't judge a guy until he plays. He's won't play until Favre's gone. 1.6 million is not that much for a backup quarterback.
     
  18. TOPackerFan

    TOPackerFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    2,084
    Ratings:
    +0
    Patterson and Mankins are playing pretty well to, but I think that Rodgers was the best pick to make at that point, no question.
     
  19. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    Jason Campbell in Washington looks like an up and comer.....
     
  20. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    Yikes!
     
  21. CaliforniaCheez

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    I am suprised you stopped so abruptly at the 32nd pick and did not go further.

    Spencer, Castillo, Miller, Patterson, would all have contributed.

    However, of those listed Mankins would have started for the Packers instead of the Patriots. 32 starts is a lot better than zero.
     
  22. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    yeah TT sucks for thinking about the future or in case Brett got hurt.
     
  23. Cory

    Cory Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2006
    Messages:
    959
    Ratings:
    +0
    Or retired...
     
  24. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    wait, there was more than 1 reason for the move?! gasp
     
  25. CaliforniaCheez

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yeah, Craig Nall wasn't expensive enough.
     

Share This Page