Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pokerbrat2000" data-source="post: 716596" data-attributes="member: 7261">I get your first part "What failed is not the draft class but the ability to retain said players", easy conclusion, since 4 were resigned by other teams.  However, its somewhat of a failure when you consider these were guys drafted by Green Bay for the purpose of contributing beyond 4 years and I don't think by letting all 4 go, the Packers even saw the purpose of keeping them around.  Hyde, Tretter and I think Jones didn't even get an offer from the Packers.  If Lacy did, it wasn't enough.  Was Casey Hayward in 2012 a successful draft choice for the Packers?  While he ended up being a good player (for the Chargers), I don't think the Packers got nearly the value out him that you would expect for a #2 pick.While the comp picks are nice and smart of you to point out, IMO they still don't translate/factor much into calling the draft a success in the way of retaining guys.  Meaning that instead of having your #1, #2, #4 and #5 picks developed and contributing, you have the potential of 4 mid to late round picks 5 years later (initial draft date).  While that might work for teams that use other means more frequently to acquire players other than the draft, for a team that is built on draft and develop, draft and let go doesn't seem like a formula for success.</blockquote>

Total: 70 (members: 2, guests: 68)