Is this the worst draft in this decade for the Packers?

[tynimiller]

Agree. I'm fine with the Love pick, but not with the following picks.

AJ Dillon in the 2nd round is terrible, same for Josiah Deguara in the 3rd. I bet you get both players in later rounds. Dillon maybe at the end of the draft. Both are a massive reach and I don't think they'll help us right now. I don't think the offense was the problem last year. It was the run defense and the coverage in the middle of the field.

We were one win away from the Super Bowl, so i still don't understand why we don't address our biggest needs. Especially DL and ILB. Yeah, we picked an ILB, but he is poor in coverage. Something which has killed us very often in the past season.
It's also ridiculous to not draft a single WR in maybe the best and deepest WR class ever.

This isn't Aaron Rodgers team anymore, it's LaFleurs and he obviously doesn't care about draft value.

Okay, I'm with you on my personal rankings of Dillon and Deguara were not as high as we took them...but only by one round for me. The idea that Dillon, a running back built like a TANK, but with his speed and smooth and adequate hands lasting till the end of the draft is ludacris.

Outside of Murray I don't see an ILB in the draft that for sure is better than Kirksey - while I wanted to go the route of a Mykal Walker or Justin Strnad when we went Kamal, he isn't a terrible pick at all for the round. His 2018 tape before his injury is ridiculous, and is why heading into 2019 some had him touted as a HIGH Day 2 ILB.

 

[Dantés]

Agree. I'm fine with the Love pick, but not with the following picks.

AJ Dillon in the 2nd round is terrible, same for Josiah Deguara in the 3rd. I bet you get both players in later rounds. Dillon maybe at the end of the draft. Both are a massive reach and I don't think they'll help us right now. I don't think the offense was the problem last year. It was the run defense and the coverage in the middle of the field.

We were one win away from the Super Bowl, so i still don't understand why we don't address our biggest needs. Especially DL and ILB. Yeah, we picked an ILB, but he is poor in coverage. Something which has killed us very often in the past season.
It's also ridiculous to not draft a single WR in maybe the best and deepest WR class ever.

This isn't Aaron Rodgers team anymore, it's LaFleurs and he obviously doesn't care about draft value.

Running backs in general went a lot higher than the projections led fans to believe. Dillon, Vaughn, and Evans were all mid round projections who people thought (myself included-- no judgment) might have been available in rounds 4 or 5. They all went on day two. The tier that people thought my be available even later than that (Kelley, Perine, MacFarland, Dallas) all went in round 4. A grand total of four running backs went in rounds 5-7, where a lot of people thought the Packers might find a back: Jason Huntley, Eno Benjamin, Raymond Calais, and Malcolm Perry.

In general, it's baseless to call any player in the draft a "reach." Teams make decisions based on their own evaluations and their own draft boards. Judging their decisions based on media rankings makes no sense. That doesn't mean every pick is good, or we have to like every choice. Obviously not. But when a fan says that a team reached because of rankings they saw on Bleacher Report or something, they are essentially saying that in this disagreement between an NFL FO and some amateur fan blogger, they're going to defer to the latter. That's crazy.

But even moreso in this case, the way that the RB position fell in the draft as a whole suggests that Dillon wouldn't have lasted until their next pick, much less to the end of the draft. That argument completely ignores what actually happened. The evidence points to one conclusion-- the league liked these players a lot more than the media did.

In the case of Deguara, there is also evidence that the NFL liked him more than the media, and that he would not have been available later. Throughout the process, there were two guys identified as potential H-backs who were consistently projected near one another: Josiah Deguara and Dalton Keene. Deguara surprised people when he was taken at #94, but then Keene went at #101. A grand total of three tight ends went from rounds 5-7: Charlie Woerner, Tyler Davis, and Stephen Sullivan.

The only player that went rounds 4-7 that's even a little bit like Deguara is Charlie Woerner, and he went round 6 and is a lesser prospect by a considerable degree.

It's been a groupthink mantra since the draft for fans to say "We could have gotten these guys later! They reached!" but there is literally zero evidence that that's true, and simply looking at the draft results as a whole should be enough to realize that there's little to no chance that it's true.

 

[Mondio]

all this reach stuff is kind of funny. I mean, I do jack squat for pre-draft analysis. Outside of maybe a guy or 2 and then a handful I recognize from the college games I actually watched during the season which usually are big 10 games, i know nothing about any of them until they're drafted.

For the Amish's contest I used all the big "mock" drafts and saw who was around where we'd be picking and made some picks. almost ALL of my picks, all 20 were in the wrong round based on experts LOL. mostly the highly rated guys were graded a round or 2 too high and the mid and lower were rated to low vs where they were picked. Not unexpected by me at all, I don't know why people are so surprised it never lines up how they say it should.

I still remember the Rodgers and Collins draft. same story, i'm not married to any draft pick or where they should go. Luke warm on Rodgers and as soon as I started looking into Nick Collins I loved that pick. Everyone was having emotional reactions based on how they "thought" it should go and not a reaction based on the actual player they picked. That 2nd round reach was one of the best players in the entire draft, and every year people think they're so right the day after the draft concludes. I'm a slow learner, but i'm not that slow. Come on guys.

 

[Dantés]

all this reach stuff is kind of funny. I mean, I do jack squat for pre-draft analysis. Outside of maybe a guy or 2 and then a handful I recognize from the college games I actually watched during the season which usually are big 10 games, i know nothing about any of them until they're drafted.

For the Amish's contest I used all the big "mock" drafts and saw who was around where we'd be picking and made some picks. almost ALL of my picks, all 20 were in the wrong round based on experts LOL. mostly the highly rated guys were graded a round or 2 too high and the mid and lower were rated to low vs where they were picked. Not unexpected by me at all, I don't know why people are so surprised it never lines up how they say it should.

I still remember the Rodgers and Collins draft. same story, i'm not married to any draft pick or where they should go. Luke warm on Rodgers and as soon as I started looking into Nick Collins I loved that pick. Everyone was having emotional reactions based on how they "thought" it should go and not a reaction based on the actual player they picked. That 2nd round reach was one of the best players in the entire draft, and every year people think they're so right the day after the draft concludes. I'm a slow learner, but i'm not that slow. Come on guys.

Same. I closely watch a bunch of guys who I think might be fits on day one or two, and by a bunch I mean like 30. Beyond that, I'm reading reports, looking at metrics, and catching snippets here and there.

What I've learned is that the less fans know about the draft or a draft class, the more opinionated and self-assured they are about where guys should have been drafted.

Being ignorant and being outspoken seem to have a strong correlation.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The "standard draft value trade chart" is a wild *** guess. To quote it as gospel is ridiculous. If you'd prefer to a have a 26 and no 136 as opposed to a 30 and a 136 that'd your business. I'd rather have the two picks.

We'll find out for certain in 4 years if the Love pick was worth it. But history says it won't be and so do I.

LOL....first you claim that by trading away the 4th pick, the Packers gave up the opportunity to select guys on a list you assembled of 4th round picks. Your list included nobody chosen at #136 or later....all earlier and some much earlier. Now you say it was a dumb move because the trade charts mean nothing?

I for one never said that the Draft Value Trade Charts being used were gospel, your words, not mine. However, if you follow football to some extent, you hear "draft value" and "trade charts" referred to quite a bit. Each team may have its own variation of what works for them and its not an exact science but more of a guide as to what other teams will most likely be looking for in a trade scenario.

Gute obviously wanted to jump up and prevent any teams ahead of him to grab Love, so he viewed giving Miami a late 4th round pick as fair trade to do so, the Dolphins obviously did too, every chart I have looked at says the Packers "win" that trade value.

Based on your previous post (below) and several others about Gute and the draft, I have to guess that its more the player that you don't like, than disliking the trade. Your last statement above is further evidence of it "We'll find out for certain in 4 years if the Love pick was worth it. But history says it won't be and so do I." What history are you referring to? Again, player aside, I and the charts both say Gute got good value on the deal, player aside.

Rashan Gary at 12 was bad. This is worse.

Just a horrible pick. I'm done with this team. F you Gutey.

 

[Dantés]

I for one never said that the Draft Value Trade Charts being used were gospel, your words, not mine. However, if you follow football to some extent, you hear "draft value" and "trade charts" referred to quite a bit. Each team may have its own variation of what works for them and its not an exact science but more of a guide as to what other teams will most likely be looking for in a trade scenario.

Gute obviously wanted to jump up and prevent any teams ahead of him to grab Love, so he viewed giving Miami a late 4th round pick as fair trade to do so, the Dolphins obviously did too, every chart I have looked at says the Packers "win" that trade value.

Based on your previous post (below) and several others about Gute and the draft, I have to guess that its more the player that you don't like, than disliking the trade. Your last statement above is further evidence of it "We'll find out for certain in 4 years if the Love pick was worth it. But history says it won't be and so do I." Again, player aside, I and the charts both say Gute got good value on the deal, player aside.

And more to the point-- if Love hits and the Packers got him for #30 and #136, they win, win, win, win.

Teams regularly trade boatloads of draft capital for their shot at their next franchise QB.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

And more to the point-- if Love hits and the Packers got him for #30 and #136, they win, win, win, win.

Shhhhhh....don't say that. Those who hate the trade and pick prefer to consider Love a complete washout before he plays a single down of NFL football. Had we not made the move, we would have drafted All Pro's at both 30 and 136!

I said this the day after the Jordan Love pick. If he ends up being an average QB....good pick. If he ends up being an above average QB...great pick. If he ends up being the 3rd HOF QB in a row by the franchise, this move and pick will be talked about way beyond the next 4 yrs. and Gute will have proved a lot of naysayers wrong.

If Love fails to become a starter, than at that time, we can all say it turned out to be a bad pick. However, I will never say that it wasn't a good gamble to try and find Rodgers replacement, something we were on the clock to do at some point. More to the point, if Love doesn't make it, I won't remember this as a top 5 draft blunder by the Packers.

 

[adambr2]

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

Woof.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

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

Woof.

LOL at Looney being on that list....now THAT is a reach. Looney was a 2018 7th round pick as a DT. Last year the Packers decided to see what he could do as a TE.

Kind of curious what the rest of the list is suppose to signify or what the point of the Tweet was? That Gute has pumped a lot of assets into the starting offense or Gute hasn't put many high value assets into the offense?

 

[adambr2]

LOL at Looney being on that list....now THAT is a reach. Looney was a 2018 7th round pick as a DT. Last year the Packers decided to see what he could do as a TE.

Kind of curious what the rest of the list is suppose to signify or what the point of the Tweet was? That Gute has pumped a lot of assets into the starting offense or Gute hasn't put many high value assets into the offense?

I dunno. Just passing along the info. I'd guess the point is that not a lot of talent has been infused in the offense in the last 3 years, which I would agree with.

 

[Mondio]

who cares, 3 years ago, we still had a crap load of giant holes on defense. We played the out score them game too often already. Last year he was drafting for a returning DC who knew what they had and what they needed. This year the new HC who's running the offense saw what he had and what he needed and they started moving in on offensive guys they liked. What's so hard to understand? It's a football team, needs never go away, neither does the need for offense, defense or special teams. can all win or lose you a game.

The smarter move for Gute would have been to ignore the defense and draft for a coach and offensive philosophy who was a big man on thin ice?

 

[Pugger]

I understand the Love pick. we can't wait until AR retires. But. After last years game against the 49ers and our run defense I just don't understand. We pick an inside LB that is poor in coverage and bad on the outside runs. I know we were only one blow out away from a superbowl appearance. yup worst draft since Tony Mandwich

If our offense actually did anything in that playoff game in SF we wouldn't have been blown out and for all we know the game could have had a different outcome. It is obvious we are going in a different direction offensively than we did with MM. Leaning on a running game to open up the passing game isn't heresy. And if P-A keeps Rodgers upright so pass rushers are not just pinning their ears back like Bosa and company it will be good thing in the next 2-3 years while Love is under apprentagement.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I dunno. Just passing along the info. I'd guess the point is that not a lot of talent has been infused in the offense in the last 3 years, which I would agree with.

I do agree with that premise. I guess those are the kinds of tweets, that without a reference point, I get lost on. He listed 19 names, which could appear to some, that Gute has attempted to infuse talent into the offense.

 

[adambr2]

who cares, 3 years ago, we still had a crap load of giant holes on defense. We played the out score them game too often already. Last year he was drafting for a returning DC who knew what they had and what they needed. This year the new HC who's running the offense saw what he had and what he needed and they started moving in on offensive guys they liked. What's so hard to understand? It's a football team, needs never go away, neither does the need for offense, defense or special teams. can all win or lose you a game.

The smarter move for Gute would have been to ignore the defense and draft for a coach and offensive philosophy who was a big man on thin ice?

Did the move made for the returning DC on defense really improve it enough to the point where it needs to be? Based on the NFCCG I would say most definitely not. Do you have any confidence that the defense we see in 2020 based on the moves this offseason are in any better of a position than the team we saw against the 49ers in January?

 

[Mondio]

Did the move made for the returning DC on defense really improve it enough to the point where it needs to be? Based on the NFCCG I would say most definitely not. Do you have any confidence that the defense we see in 2020 based on the moves this offseason are in any better of a position than the team we saw against the 49ers in January?

We got our ***** handed to us against the 9ers. Not much else to say, but yes, our defense was definitely more consistent and better last year the than the year prior.

Think we would have been on the nffcg with 2018’s defense?

regardless, of what you think was in the field, I don’t see any wisdom in going offense heavy for a coach on his way out or for a coach that doesn’t know what he has or what he needs. When we better knew what defense needed to fit the current coach.

 

[adambr2]

The Saints just signed Jameis Winston. I think I'd rather have Love than him.

Winston signed for $1.1M plus some incentives that he probably won't get. He may not likely be their QB of the future, but that is absolute highway robbery for a capable backup QB with starting experience who can adequately fill in in a pinch. And they didn't have to give up a 1st and 4th for him.

Love is a future project/investment. You're banking on the upside. There isn't a coach alive who would take him over Winston to win one single game in 2020, though.

 

[Pugger]

Winston signed for $1.1M plus some incentives that he probably won't get. He may not likely be their QB of the future, but that is absolute highway robbery for a capable backup QB with starting experience who can adequately fill in in a pinch. And they didn't have to give up a 1st and 4th for him.

Love is a future project/investment. You're banking on the upside. There isn't a coach alive who would take him over Winston to win one single game in 2020, though.

I guess I'm not a fan of Winston. I find him inconsistent as hell.

 

[adambr2]

I guess I'm not a fan of Winston. I find him inconsistent as hell.

I wouldn't want him as my opening day starter either. But for a backup, you could do much worse.

 

[RicFlairoftheNFL]

I would agree with that even less, honestly. He had a very good 2008 in his first year starting with over 4,000 yards and 28 TDs.

He had 3 full seasons sitting behind Favre. That's almost unprecedented for a 1st round potential franchise QB to get that much developmental time before becoming the starter. And you think he should have had a 4th year of sitting?

He was plenty ready to start by his 4th season, as he showed in '08. There was nothing wrong with their developmental plan for Aaron Rodgers, and to stick Rodgers on the bench yet again after Favre's retirement would have almost surely invited trade requests by that point.

Another point is that by 2009 you're running out of time to figure out whether this guy can be your franchise QB as you've learned absolutely nothing about that potential by having him sit for 4 years and now his rookie deal is coming to an end. Under the current CBA you'd literally have to commit to a 5th year option choice before your franchise QB has even had a chance to start. There's absolutely no logic to your assertion that the Packers went to Rodgers too early in 2008.

4,000 yds 28 TDs and a 6-10 record. Great year!

 

[adambr2]

4,000 yds 28 TDs and a 6-10 record. Great year!

Really, judging QB performance by overall team record even though the offense was 8th in the NFL that year in both points scored and yardage?

I guess Favre would have found a way for the Packers 2008 defense to not cough up numerous late leads.

 

[rmontro]

I've heard two conflicting reports about this draft. One was that they wanted Love and were willing to do whatever they had to do to get him.

And the other was that they were open to taking a WR, but the ones they wanted were off the board by the time they got to pick. It appears to me that if #1 is true, the second sounds like a stretch. Maybe they were open to picking a WR as a plan B if they couldn't get Love.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I've heard two conflicting reports about this draft. One was that they wanted Love and were willing to do whatever they had to do to get him.

And the other was that they were open to taking a WR, but the ones they wanted were off the board by the time they got to pick. It appears to me that if #1 is true, the second sounds like a stretch. Maybe they were open to picking a WR as a plan B if they couldn't get Love.

Wouldn't surprise me one bit if the plan was a mix of both of those. That being a plan of "Love" or these WR's". There were 6 WR's taken before the Packers moved up to the 26th spot, with Aiyuk going at 25. Gute might have said to himself "well, all our first round WR's are all off the board, Love is still there, but I think there are a few teams that might try and move by us at 30 to get him. The Dolphins already picked Tua and Austin Jackson, lets see if they want to trade."

I also heard Gute was on the phone with Seattle, trying to move up to #27, but hung up quickly with a "we got a better deal thanks".

 

[Patriotplayer90]

I've heard two conflicting reports about this draft. One was that they wanted Love and were willing to do whatever they had to do to get him.

And the other was that they were open to taking a WR, but the ones they wanted were off the board by the time they got to pick. It appears to me that if #1 is true, the second sounds like a stretch. Maybe they were open to picking a WR as a plan B if they couldn't get Love.

That is the most likely scenario.

 

[RicFlairoftheNFL]

Really, judging QB performance by overall team record even though the offense was 8th in the NFL that year in both points scored and yardage?

I guess Favre would have found a way for the Packers 2008 defense to not cough up numerous late leads.

No...Favre would've figured out how to score when he had the ball last

 

[adambr2]

No...Favre would've figured out how to score when he had the ball last

Well, there were plenty of times when Favre in fact did not find a way to score last. In his very last game with the Packers with a chance to take them to the Super Bowl, he had the ball and a chance to score last and instead threw a really terrible pass and sent the Giants to the Super Bowl.


This Favre vs. Rodgers in the 2008 season is just a really weird hill to pick to die on. It's obvious that you've decided to dig in on this argument and no amount of evidence is going to convince you otherwise, but you have just offered nothing in good supporting arguments as to why we should have stuck with Favre in '08 and let Rodgers ride the pine for a 4th year.


Aaron Rodgers was ready to start in his 4th year, there's no doubt. His performance in '08 was fine, and actually, quite good for a first year starter. His defense was very bad, there's a reason the entire system was overhauled in '08 before the '09 season. If your 1st round pick is not ready to play by his 4th year, he probably isn't your guy.


Would Favre have given us a better chance to win in '08 than Rodgers? I don't know, maybe? We were a 6-10 team. Favre wasn't taking the '08 Packers to the Super Bowl. And again, Rodgers was quite good in '08 and Favre was quite mediocre with the Jets. I realize that the offensive system changes and receivers play a part in that, which is why I said "maybe". I really don't know, but even if so, it wouldn't have made a significant difference. The '08 team as a whole played much worse than '07. And the '07 team, frankly, much like '19, played a bit over their heads.


Finally, again, even if Favre DID give the Packers a better chance in '08 than Rodgers, you cannot look at all this stuff in a vacuum. This is not a video game. If Favre comes out of retirement and Rodgers has to sit and hold a clipboard for a 4th year, he is almost certainly asking for a trade. Even if he doesn't ask for one then, Favre played for 3 more seasons from '08 to '10. You think Rodgers was just going to sit and wait that out? You think that the Packers were going to go ahead and give him starter money after his rookie contract to just be Favre's backup for 6 seasons when they had never even gotten a chance to see him start?


You're making an emotional argument rather than a rational one because you loved Favre when in reality there is absolutely no supporting logic whatsoever that the Packers erred in making the move to Rodgers in '08 after Favre's initial retirement.