Interesting...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
ChucKcECiL26: Yo Pete,

Today A. Batman Carrol was released by the Jaguars. Does this not sum up the whole Sherman 'error'?


PETE DOUGHERTY: It does. A reach pick on a need. I remember Sherman talking so highly of his character and later hearing that people at Arkansas didn't like him. Maybe somebody Sherman knew and trusted at Arkansas snowed him. But that was a bad need pick, something to remember when criticizing Thompson for picking Harrell even though he had greater needs on offense.


Which do you prefer?
Sherman's reaching for need, or Thompson's taking who he feels is the best player available?
 
OP
OP
Zero2Cool

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
Ed Armour: Can Fans adequately judge a GM's performance?
Hi Pete, I believe that while a draft's quality usually takes 3 years to know, a draft's strategy and value can be judged sooner. I also believe that a fan can have an informed opinion about such things. In Rob Demovsky's last chat he seemed to concur with the idea that fans have about as much business of questioning Ted Thompson's draft as a patient would an ER Doctor. I quite frankly find this insultingly dismissive.

I don't think there are very many sane fans out there that would seriously believe that they know more about the NFL and available talent out there than Ted Thompson or any other GM. However, there have been a few occassions where the fans have been right, and the professionals wrong. How long were fans questioning why Jenkins wasn't given more of a chance at RDE before the Packers finally did it, and it worked out. There have been other times of course when going against the fans, like trading our first round pick, for Atlanta' third string QB worked out okay. However, I really think the issue is one of judging strategy and results, not whether we could do better ourselves.

Consider this, is it appropriate for people to have an opinion about George Bush's job as President? I don't think that most citizens feel they should be in charge of our armed forces, but many have opinions about the wars in Iraq and Afganistan. We have to make some sort of judgements when we cast our votes, don't we. Should we not vote? How many top level security briefings have you (or I) been too, or conferences on Global Warming, or Round Tables on VAT Taxes?

I personally agree with Mike Vandermause's column that Thompson has been too cautious this year. That being said, I do like our picks too. Maybe, it will all work out, and I'm perpared to give Thompson at least two more years. However, I'd like to point out that Sherman only had three drafts as GM; this has been Thompson's third draft. Your thoughts?


PETE DOUGHERTY: I know what you're saying, and informed fans have good opinions about many things. But how many other changes or non-changes have fans clamored for where they were wrong? It's countless, so just because they're right a few times doesn't mean an NFL team should take their advice. You're right that fans can adequately judge a GM's performance, but I don't see any way that they can judge Thompson's or any other GM's performance in this draft. No one on the planet can. Not Bill Polian, not Bill Belichick, not anyone. Can they judge Thompson's work overall? Yeah, they and the rest of us can start drawing some conclusions, but we'd all be wise to remember that he inherited a team that was in inevitable decline, so context is meaningful. You're right, it's hard to argue with the notion that he has to make some kind of aggressive move at some point, unless he ends up with top pick in the draft and gets a Peyton Manning-type. They did it in Seattle with the Matt Hasselbeck trade, though that's probably one where Holmgren had a huge influence -- I'm guessing that, don't know it as a fact.


Another good one.
 

Oannes

Cheesehead
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
196
Reaction score
0
Don't fall for TT's lie. He's not taking the BPA. He's taking what he thinks is the BPA at what positions he feels we need.

Think for a second. Do you honestly think if we had sealed the deal on Randy Moss before the draft TT would've thought James Jones was the BPA?

or... Do you think if Ahman was given the money and stayed in Green Bay we'd have taken Brandon Jackson because he was the BPA?

Please, think... The Packers took how many lineman last draft? Daryn Colledge, Jason Spitz and Tony Moll were all the BPA when we selected? Stop it. He drafts for NEED despite what he says.
 

Packnic

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
2,454
Reaction score
6
Location
Salisbury, NC
of course TT drafts on what the BPA is in his mind. he doesnt do what most of you haters do and go strictly by what ESPN says. and thank god. BPA in his mind is all that matters.
 

Arles

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
304
Reaction score
0
Don't fall for TT's lie. He's not taking the BPA. He's taking what he thinks is the BPA at what positions he feels we need.

Think for a second. Do you honestly think if we had sealed the deal on Randy Moss before the draft TT would've thought James Jones was the BPA?

or... Do you think if Ahman was given the money and stayed in Green Bay we'd have taken Brandon Jackson because he was the BPA?
You're right, if a QB is the BPA at each spot we draft, I doubt we take 7 QBs and call it a draft. :thumbsup:

You have a set of positions you would like to get players. For TT, I'm guessing this was RB, WR, TE, OT, DT, LB, CB and S. Then, you have a pool of players from those positions. At this point, TT seems to take the BPA on his board. Then, as you grab players, maybe one position falls off the list. Finally, in the later rounds, you expand the list again because you are looking for talents who might make the roster. Which, IMO, is a solid strategy.

Sherman, on the other hand, would go into the draft badly needing a CB. And, at our first pick, he would take the best CB available (regardless of value). Not a good strategy.

Please, think... The Packers took how many lineman last draft? Daryn Colledge, Jason Spitz and Tony Moll were all the BPA when we selected? Stop it. He drafts for NEED despite what he says.
TT also tends to trade down when he hits a spot with multiple options. So, if he sees 3-4 linemen he likes and 2 WRs, maybe he trades down 7 spots and still grabs one of the linemen. Whereas, if he kept the pick, maybe the BPA would have been a WR. So, by trading down, TT can get to situations where the position he wants happens to be the BPA and get more picks for later. I think he did it with Jackson in this draft and with guys like Jennings and Colledge in 06.
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
Oannes said:
Don't fall for TT's lie. He's not taking the BPA. He's taking what he thinks is the BPA at what positions he feels we need.

Think for a second. Do you honestly think if we had sealed the deal on Randy Moss before the draft TT would've thought James Jones was the BPA?

or... Do you think if Ahman was given the money and stayed in Green Bay we'd have taken Brandon Jackson because he was the BPA?
You're right, if a QB is the BPA at each spot we draft, I doubt we take 7 QBs and call it a draft. :thumbsup:

You have a set of positions you would like to get players. For TT, I'm guessing this was RB, WR, TE, OT, DT, LB, CB and S. Then, you have a pool of players from those positions. At this point, TT seems to take the BPA on his board. Then, as you grab players, maybe one position falls off the list. Finally, in the later rounds, you expand the list again because you are looking for talents who might make the roster. Which, IMO, is a solid strategy.

Sherman, on the other hand, would go into the draft badly needing a CB. And, at our first pick, he would take the best CB available (regardless of value). Not a good strategy.

Please, think... The Packers took how many lineman last draft? Daryn Colledge, Jason Spitz and Tony Moll were all the BPA when we selected? Stop it. He drafts for NEED despite what he says.
TT also tends to trade down when he hits a spot with multiple options. So, if he sees 3-4 linemen he likes and 2 WRs, maybe he trades down 7 spots and still grabs one of the linemen. Whereas, if he kept the pick, maybe the BPA would have been a WR. So, by trading down, TT can get to situations where the position he wants happens to be the BPA and get more picks for later. I think he did it with Jackson in this draft and with guys like Jennings and Colledge in 06.

Good points, Arles. A lot of fans have been dumping on Thompson for trading down so often, but in three drafts, he has yet to trade down in the first round, and although he has traded down in the second round, he has never opted out of the second round completely, as Sherman did for all three of his drafts. By the time you get around midway through the second round, or even near the end of the first round in off years, the differences in talent are not nearly as striking as they are with the upper-echelon players, so trades down are much less likely to amount to major downgrades in talent.

I think Thompson went BPA with his first round pick and then started filling needs, for the most part.
 

packerfan1245

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
721
Reaction score
0
Why would you take the best player available? In the draft you fill your holes of needs to win a championship.
 

pack_in_black

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado Springs
Why would you take the best player available? In the draft you fill your holes of needs to win a championship.

Well, I think that the point of this whole thread was to point out the downside of drafting to fill holes of needs.


And to win a championship, depth is always a need. Taking BPA gives you just that, depth.

When you draft to fill a hole, there is the likelihood of it being a reach. See: Ahmad Carroll.
 

packerfan1245

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
721
Reaction score
0
Players like carrol happen. We needed a cornerback and we took 1. Only problem was we took a bad one. I still see no sense at all in taking a player at the position you already have good players at.
 

pyledriver80

Cheesehead
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
0
ChucKcECiL26: Yo Pete,

Today A. Batman Carrol was released by the Jaguars. Does this not sum up the whole Sherman 'error'?


PETE DOUGHERTY: It does. A reach pick on a need. I remember Sherman talking so highly of his character and later hearing that people at Arkansas didn't like him. Maybe somebody Sherman knew and trusted at Arkansas snowed him. But that was a bad need pick, something to remember when criticizing Thompson for picking Harrell even though he had greater needs on offense.


Which do you prefer?
Sherman's reaching for need, or Thompson's taking who he feels is the best player available?


I prefer Sherman's Division Titles and Playoff appearences...... :whippin:
 

pack_in_black

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado Springs
Zero2Cool said:
ChucKcECiL26: Yo Pete,

Today A. Batman Carrol was released by the Jaguars. Does this not sum up the whole Sherman 'error'?


PETE DOUGHERTY: It does. A reach pick on a need. I remember Sherman talking so highly of his character and later hearing that people at Arkansas didn't like him. Maybe somebody Sherman knew and trusted at Arkansas snowed him. But that was a bad need pick, something to remember when criticizing Thompson for picking Harrell even though he had greater needs on offense.

Which do you prefer?
Sherman's reaching for need, or Thompson's taking who he feels is the best player available?


I prefer Sherman's Division Titles and Playoff appearences...... :whippin:

Yeah, and what a proud division the NFC North was......
 
OP
OP
Zero2Cool

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
Zero2Cool said:
ChucKcECiL26: Yo Pete,

Today A. Batman Carrol was released by the Jaguars. Does this not sum up the whole Sherman 'error'?


PETE DOUGHERTY: It does. A reach pick on a need. I remember Sherman talking so highly of his character and later hearing that people at Arkansas didn't like him. Maybe somebody Sherman knew and trusted at Arkansas snowed him. But that was a bad need pick, something to remember when criticizing Thompson for picking Harrell even though he had greater needs on offense.


Which do you prefer?
Sherman's reaching for need, or Thompson's taking who he feels is the best player available?


I prefer Sherman's Division Titles and Playoff appearences...... :whippin:

Sherman inherited a better team than Ted did. I wonder how the Packers would have faired if Ted was GM directly after Wolf.
 

Since69

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
422
Reaction score
0
Why would you take the best player available? In the draft you fill your holes of needs to win a championship.

You didn't include the sarcasm smiley, so I'll assume you're not kidding.

Drafting for need is a terrible strategy. You wind up reaching for players you think you have to have and (worse yet, like Sherman often did) sometimes trade up to get him. When that doesn't work, you've screwed your team twice - you wasted a draft pick (or two, or three) and you've still got that hole in your roster.

The draft is used to build depth and a talent base. Plugging holes is best done with proven players in free agency.
 

Arles

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
304
Reaction score
0
Players like carrol happen. We needed a cornerback and we took 1. Only problem was we took a bad one. I still see no sense at all in taking a player at the position you already have good players at.
I don't see these as the only two options. Most teams have multiple needs, so taking the best player at one of those need spots in the early rounds is a much better strategy than just taking the best at the top need position (regardless of talent) or BPA independent of need.
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
pyledriver80 said:
Zero2Cool said:
ChucKcECiL26: Yo Pete,

Today A. Batman Carrol was released by the Jaguars. Does this not sum up the whole Sherman 'error'?


PETE DOUGHERTY: It does. A reach pick on a need. I remember Sherman talking so highly of his character and later hearing that people at Arkansas didn't like him. Maybe somebody Sherman knew and trusted at Arkansas snowed him. But that was a bad need pick, something to remember when criticizing Thompson for picking Harrell even though he had greater needs on offense.


Which do you prefer?
Sherman's reaching for need, or Thompson's taking who he feels is the best player available?


I prefer Sherman's Division Titles and Playoff appearences...... :whippin:

Sherman inherited a better team than Ted did. I wonder how the Packers would have faired if Ted was GM directly after Wolf.
Don't muddy the waters with FACTS again Zero!!!
Pyle would prefer a guy that took a great team with lots of talent, and got them no where in the playoffs. Yeah, they made it there, then he screwed it up each time.
So now we have to rebuild because of it, and somehow it's TT and MM's faults for not getting it done in 2 seasons.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
7,033
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Canada
I won't judge Sherman against Ted, to me that's like comparing apples and oranges.

When Sherman took over (like you said zero) the Packers were a LOT closer to a contending team, and so I think his strategy reflected that: picking up players to solve your needs.

I think when Ted took over, it was apparent that Sherman had tried too many times to get that extra play-maker we so desperately needed. That had left us with too many misses, and hurt our depth.

So basically, I had no problem (for the most part) with Sherman's approach. At the time he was in charge, I think he drafted in a way that was justified (and certainly he put in a ton of work in his drafts). This point in time, I think Ted is exactly what we need, and prefer his approach.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
7,033
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Canada
I just don't like the outcome of them.

Was it that surprising though?

I mean at best, even Ted's approach is that 50% of the guys will make it; and that's with his extra picks.

Sherman hurt himself when he traded up, reducing his picks. His sample size was going to be a lot smaller (compared to Ted's) so every failure would have a greater impact.

MS's drafts look like a bit of a mess now with foresight, but at the time I think Sherman had the Lombardi trophy dangling in front of him, and he hoped against hope that certain flaws with players would work themselves out. If I was in that situation, I'd have probably done the same.

I think ultimately, that exposes Sherman's major flaw: he just didn't know what to do to get over that little hump that held the Packers back. He looked to guys with all the measurables to try and solve that problem. It backfired (for the most part) big time.
 
OP
OP
Zero2Cool

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
all about da packers said:
I just don't like the outcome of them.

Was it that surprising though?

I mean at best, even Ted's approach is that 50% of the guys will make it; and that's with his extra picks.

Sherman hurt himself when he traded up, reducing his picks. His sample size was going to be a lot smaller (compared to Ted's) so every failure would have a greater impact.

MS's drafts look like a bit of a mess now with foresight, but at the time I think Sherman had the Lombardi trophy dangling in front of him, and he hoped against hope that certain flaws with players would work themselves out. If I was in that situation, I'd have probably done the same.

I think ultimately, that exposes Sherman's major flaw: he just didn't know what to do to get over that little hump that held the Packers back. He looked to guys with all the measurables to try and solve that problem. It backfired (for the most part) big time.

Well, I thought Joe Johnson was going to be good. We had Terry Glenn then traded him away. I'd have liked to have kept him. That's two jus off the top of my head that I was surprised about.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Latest posts

Top