Didn't like all the trading down

[DePack]

I don't pretend to know more than TT but I also don't have blind faith in him like others seem to do. This draft like every draft can't be judged for a couple years. I just don't agree philosophically with trading down as much as he did. I would have loved to have had picks 36 and 37. I wanted Sinorice Moss. I think he went 44-45. If you are truley confident of your picks than take quality instead of quantity.

Now please don't rip me for "bashing" TT. I'm not. Maybe he wanted Colledge and figured he could get him at 47. I also think we could have gotten more for Walker if he had tried to trade him a week or two earlier.

 

[P@ck66]

I agree..

Moss would have been a good pick DePack...

(oh well..at least TT didn't "screw up" the Hawk pick...)

...and yeah..He could have gotten more for Walker....imo...

 

[rabidgopher04]

I was even disappointed that he got rid of our final 3rd round pick. I thought we were done trading.

 

[musccy]

OK....I agree agree w/ you guys to some degree on the wr situation...too little for javon, and I'm not a big fan of jennings (would love to be proven wrong, which I likely will)...

However, the walker trade was essentially how we got the additional 4 picks...I'm not eccstatic about giving up proven talent for low round potential...but on the other hand, there have been a lot of productive contributors to the Packers found in the 6th and 7th...Tauscher, Driver, and Levens fall into this category...so be patient and see what we get.

 

[DePack]

OK....I agree agree w/ you guys to some degree on the wr situation...too little for javon, and I'm not a big fan of jennings (would love to be proven wrong, which I likely will)...

However, the walker trade was essentially how we got the additional 4 picks...I'm not eccstatic about giving up proven talent for low round potential...but on the other hand, there have been a lot of productive contributors to the Packers found in the 6th and 7th...Tauscher, Driver, and Levens fall into this category...so be patient and see what we get.

I'm being patient. Like I said just a difference in philosophy.

 

[longtimefan]

The question is, would you have rather waited to see if the Walker situation could have been fixed with in the next few weeks...Or take something now....

You wait a few weeks and probably got picks in 2007 draft...Or would you have taken the extra picks for this year?

TT technically got how many extra draft picks for Walker?

where as Miami and Texas only got a 2nd and a 4th respectifully for somewhat the same type of talent..

 

[Zero2Cool]

I highly doubt anyone offerred more than what we got for Javon. He was injured, a one year PB'er thats it. Not exactly the most marketable situation for the Packers, especially with him saying he would retire instead of playing for the Packers again.

With that said, a 2nd rd pick in the top ten was quite good. Trading the pick I'm not thrilled with.

 

[C-Mize]

Yah, I def dont agree with all the trading down. I could of gone w/ trading down one of the high 2nd rounders to get a couple more picks. But the talent drop off that we lost from 36/37 to 47/52 was huge, and I havent exactly agreed with all of TT's picks so far (Spitz, Rogers). Hopefully TT has something up his sleeve....

 

[LambeauEast]

QB Ingle Martin just picked...can't access his bio page at the moment though. I'm sure some people will say that picking a QB is TT's way of making sure Brett's final season is a failure...how exactly I don't know, but they will.

 

[Weissman1989]

Yea i really hated all the trading down, it has to come to a point where its just not worth it anymore.

 

[SuperRat]

I see the trading down as TT being more confident in his picks, not less. He knows he can get the player that he wants later in the draft and that he can get more players. People were mad that he passed up Chad Jackson, I couldn't understand it at first, but then I was thinking, hey he can evaluate talent alot better than me, hell I have never really watched Chad Jackson play. Then you look at it closer and Chad Jackson has only started one year in college. Many NFL teams passed him up, not just the Packers. Instead we got a guy that started 3 years in college and was very productive.

 

[wpr]

It's an interesting dilemma. I told my wife this morning that there seems to be 2 schools of thought. Either you get to draft a few impact players that will start or contribute right away and you sort of write off the rest of the draft with players of lesser ability or a team can stock pile a whole bunch of players that have some potential and might blossom some where down the road but we know that a team will get very few players in those lower rounds who are able to contribute right now.
I guess it depends where the GM/HC or even the fans see the team.
If the Packers are just a couple of players away from making it all the way back, then they should draft quality over quantity.
If the team has been devastated over the years and there are holes at almost every position (both starters and backups) then they need to get more numbers.
I personally would have liked to have seen them get the better players and fill the major gaps right now. They can work on depth later. Apparently TT sees this team has having major needs everywhere and thus wants to get a ton of players to fill out the roster.
Since this is the 2nd year he has opted for numbers over talent let's hope that come next years draft he feels the team is far enough along to look for the better caliber players 1st.
Here's something else to consider. Since TT is a hardline negotiator perhaps he needs lots of young players on the roster b/c he is willing to let the older players walk rather than give in to their salary demands.

 

[BACKIN-PACKIN]

Seems like there are a lot of Sunday afternoon armchair, Monday morning draft gurus around here!

 

[SuperRat]

Too many fans seem to think that their teams should draft whoever ESPN has projected highly, and that just wouldn't work out. Most teams didn't feel that Ko Simpson was worth using a high draft pick on and he was projected as a 2nd rounder. So did every scouting department in the NFL mess up on him? Same with Darnell Bing, who isn't even going to play safety in the NFL, he is being changed to linebacker.

 

[porky88]

I was even disappointed that he got rid of our final 3rd round pick. I thought we were done trading.

That's the only thing I was dissapointed with. When teams are rebuilding like the Packers (whether you accept it or not) it's always great to stockpile picks and take players.

I thought the first day was great for the Packers. I think every player they took is a potential starter.

Now the problem I had was trading out of the 3rd round. I thought he could've gotten another solid player. There were still some on the board. A potential CB would be nice for the Pack as well.

None the less DAy 1 was very solid. Day 2 was ok.

 

[CaliforniaCheez]

There were 4 WR's and 2 TE's taken between the traded down 3rd round pick and the 4th round selection that could have been Packers instead of the 6th round pick.

 

[DePack]

Seems like there are a lot of Sunday afternoon armchair, Monday morning draft gurus around here!

Don't be so defensive of TT. People are just giving their opinion and nobody has ripped him on this thread. Whenever people go WAY outta their way to defend someone it's usually because they don't have much faith in him.

 

[Canadian packer]

I don't get why we are stock piling players.... we can only have 53-54 players plus 6 practice roster. Alot of these players won't even play for us....

 

[tromadz]

Seems like there are a lot of Sunday afternoon armchair, Monday morning draft gurus around here!

Don't be so defensive of TT. People are just giving their opinion and nobody has ripped him on this thread. Whenever people go WAY outta their way to defend someone it's usually because they don't have much faith in him.

nowhere...did he mention TT at all. LOL

Yeah, Backin-Packin, how dare you be hopeful for the 2006 packers! Shame on you. Jeez.. . .

 

[DePack]

Seems like there are a lot of Sunday afternoon armchair, Monday morning draft gurus around here!

Don't be so defensive of TT. People are just giving their opinion and nobody has ripped him on this thread. Whenever people go WAY outta their way to defend someone it's usually because they don't have much faith in him.

nowhere...did he mention TT at all. LOL

Yeah, Backin-Packin, how dare you be hopeful for the 2006 packers! Shame on you. Jeez.. . .

WOW...once again you show your ignorance and your blind faith. If you can't read his post, you might wanna consider not posting. Did you think I was talking about you? hmmmm

 

[tromadz]

Seems like there are a lot of Sunday afternoon armchair, Monday morning draft gurus around here!

Don't be so defensive of TT. People are just giving their opinion and nobody has ripped him on this thread. Whenever people go WAY outta their way to defend someone it's usually because they don't have much faith in him.

nowhere...did he mention TT at all. LOL

Yeah, Backin-Packin, how dare you be hopeful for the 2006 packers! Shame on you. Jeez.. . .

WOW...once again you show your ignorance and your blind faith. If you can't read his post, you might wanna consider not posting. Did you think I was talking about you? hmmmm

:wtf:

 

[rabidgopher04]

I don't get why we are stock piling players.... we can only have 53-54 players plus 6 practice roster. Alot of these players won't even play for us....

That was my thinking. TT's mindset is probably to get as many low round picks as possible so he doesn't have to give them any guaranteed money so that if they don't pan out after training camp there's no cost to the Packers. But, if they turn out really good then it's a steal for the Pack.

 

[musccy]

exactly rabid...although you only keep 53 on the roster...the more ppl you have, the more chances you have of a diamond in the rough situation...probably 50% of your draft picks will crap the bed and suck...so if you have more draft picks, you increase the odds that some will pan out.

 

[LambeauEast]

exactly rabid...although you only keep 53 on the roster...the more ppl you have, the more chances you have of a diamond in the rough situation...probably 50% of your draft picks will crap the bed and suck...so if you have more draft picks, you increase the odds that some will pan out.

Well said, musccy. The creme will rise to the top, and IMHO, I see a very competitive 53 on the field on 9/10 against the Bears...once again, just my opinion.

 

[P@ck66]

I don't get why we are stock piling players.... we can only have 53-54 players plus 6 practice roster. Alot of these players won't even play for us....

That was my thinking. TT's mindset is probably to get as many low round picks as possible so he doesn't have to give them any guaranteed money so that if they don't pan out after training camp there's no cost to the Packers. But, if they turn out really good then it's a steal for the Pack.

As Winni would probably tell you...

..playing the long shots doesn't pan out...percentage wise..that is..!