Grade the Draft

[cpk1994]

Grade the Packers draft. I give it an A. Filled needs and got 2 starters.

[Joemailman]

I gave it a B. A would have required Tyson Jackson. I'd actually grade it A-/B+

[MJZiggy]

It must be an A. It made wist happy...

[gbpackfan]

I gave it B. A would have been giving up only one of our 3rd round draft picks to Belicheat. Oh well, I am happy with it.

And I think we got 3 starters. Quinn Johnson could very easilty start.

[red]

i went B

the price to trade up, is really the only thing keeping me from giving it an a

it was a damn good job from TT

[RashanGary]

I gave an A.

I love the Raji pick. He was my favorite player in this whole draft. I thought he and Andre Smith were the two best players, but both had character concerns.

I think Matthews is going to be an impact playmaker

I like the size and strength of Lang. I'm looking forward to building a more physical OL.

I like the physical play of the fullback. You smash a LB in the face in the first quarter and I don't think he's quite so eager to get hit again. I love physical football and this kid sounds like a tone setter. LB's love to hit running backs. It's nice to have a full back who can return the favor and remind them that it's not going to be a 60 minute stroll in the park. Huge fan of this pick.


The other guys all look like high upside projects. You get one or two to pan out and you have a solid back end of the draft.



All in all, the Packers took a bunch of tough, physical players. It looks like our defense becoming tougher and it also looks like our OL is going to be getting bigger and stronger over the next couple years Sitton and Lang work their way in.

[Bretsky]

I'd give it a B+

The Raji pick was alright; the Raiders really reached for a guy that had to surprise both the Jags and Packers so I don't think either team figured they could have their pick of Monroe and Crabtree and then Raji and Crabtree. Del Rio nearly too Crab as well.

TT and the scouts fell in love with a guy in Matthews and went and got him; on one hand I gained respect for TT for doing that as I figured that would be too out of character for him to pull off.

On the other hand I still think he gave up too much to Bellicheat.

Matthews play is what can push this grade to an A if he ends up being a star

Also liked the OT picks and the FB pick as well; I do wish we'd have found a way to get a punter but in retrospect I guess I'd rather have the starting FB

[Packnut]

A


This was srtictly a need draft and it's about freakin time! It took a while and a lot of bitching and moaning on my part, but me and Teddy are now in sync!

[Bretsky]

A


This was srtictly a need draft and it's about freakin time! It took a while and a lot of bitching and moaning on my part, but me and Teddy are now in sync!


you are officially a T luvr

No more pissing and whining from you regardless of how this thing turns out :!: :lol:

[Packnut]

A


This was srtictly a need draft and it's about freakin time! It took a while and a lot of bitching and moaning on my part, but me and Teddy are now in sync!


you are officially a T luvr

No more pissing and whining from you regardless of how this thing turns out :!:

He came over to my way of thinking. Now if we can just get him back on the FA train............. Oh well baby steps first! :lol:

[Bretsky]

I just hope BJ's highlight reel is comparable to the Crabs

[Packnut]

I just hope BJ's highlight reel is comparable to the Crabs

Mark my words. Crabtree will be a major disappointment.

[Bretsky]

I just hope BJ's highlight reel is comparable to the Crabs

Mark my words. Crabtree will be a major disappointment.


Man among boys; once they get a QB dude is a star

[Packnut]

I just hope BJ's highlight reel is comparable to the Crabs

Mark my words. Crabtree will be a major disappointment.


Man among boys; once they get a QB dude is a star

I got a 12 pack that says Crabby does'nt make the all rookie team.

[oregonpackfan]

I would have to give it an "A" as well. The first two picks are impact players who should be contributions as rookies.

The rest are solid "maybies." As we all know, sometimes those obscure 6th and 7th round draft choices become pleasant surprises.

[Carolina_Packer]

http://i.packers.com/draft/2009/images/09draftwrapup450.jpg

I gave it a B+ on balance. Love the top picks and some of the value picks; didn't like giving up a lot in the early/middle, but a nice recovery. Hopefully they mined some gold.

[cheesner]

A


This was srtictly a need draft and it's about freakin time! It took a while and a lot of bitching and moaning on my part, but me and Teddy are now in sync!


you are officially a T luvr

No more pissing and whining from you regardless of how this thing turns out :!:

He came over to my way of thinking. Now if we can just get him back on the FA train............. Oh well baby steps first! :lol:

I don't know. I think it was still a BPA draft. The first two picks were rated higher than they were taken so it could very well be they were BPA picks. Actually, Matthews had to be BPA. Why would you trade up to take a reach? That would make zero sense. As for the later picks, there are probably 20-50 similar value picks at each of those picks. Might just as well draft a position of need.

[cheesner]

A

I like the first two picks, I didn't think Raji would be available. Looks like we got value in the later rounds. I think the trade gave up too much. Will have to wait and see how that turns out.

But I see we got 2 starters (or BJ will at least play 50% of downs) at very important positions. I don't know if you can ask more out of a draft than that.

[Lurker64]

I really like that we got better in ways that aren't "Maybe this guy can...", there's some immediate impact apparent in this draft and it's not many TT drafts you can say that of.

I think both OL were excellent value, that's a good young group they're building there.

The only really bad thing you can say about the draft is "they gave up a lot to get Matthews", but they pretty much paid what it was going to cost as you had to give the Pats something to convince them that it was worth moving down a tier.

I'd think it's somewhere on the A-/B+ boundary.

[digitaldean]

I'd grade it a B only because we won't know their true impact for 2-3 seasons down the line.

Some should help immediately like Matthews and Raji.

Needs were addressed with each pick. Unless Johnson falls completely on his face, we are probably seeing the last of either Kuhn or Hall.

I would honestly think Poppinga will have to be either starting or gone from this line up. With his contract, he will need to be start to keep his roster spot.

Was hoping for one of the TE's to be picked.

Undrafted FA's should be interesting.

[boiga]

I was very impressed by this draft. Our lines got a major shot in the arm at both offense and defense.

However, I have to admit being surprised that we didn't even touch any of the "skill" positions. No receivers, running backs, tight ends, or corner backs. I suppose Ruvell should be breathing easier today.

[texaspackerbacker]

I give it a C--and that's contingent on Raji becoming a superstar or damn close to it.

Maybe the O Linemen will be decent. Supposedly, both were expected to go earlier.

But a fullback? And a second LB, and THROWING AWAY not 1, not 2, but 3 high level picks? That's pretty bad.

[pbmax]

I give it a 'B' because I feel better about the team than I did on Saturday morning. However, I fear someone with a brain might be in charge in Detroit.

Perhaps we could get the Jets shipped in to take their place because the next laughingstock is Mike Tannenbaum. Sanchez better be remarkable.

[Packnut]

I give it a 'B' because I feel better about the team than I did on Saturday morning. However, I fear someone with a brain might be in charge in Detroit.

Perhaps we could get the Jets shipped in to take their place because the next laughingstock is Mike Tannenbaum. Sanchez better be remarkable.

Detroit has a long long long way to go. :lol:

[red]

I give it a 'B' because I feel better about the team than I did on Saturday morning. However, I fear someone with a brain might be in charge in Detroit.

Perhaps we could get the Jets shipped in to take their place because the next laughingstock is Mike Tannenbaum. Sanchez better be remarkable.

Detroit has a long long long way to go. :lol:

agreed

they just added a few guys in the draft that could turn out to be decent, add that to the two or three they already had on the team

and that means the lions still need 46 or 47 nfl caliber players.

they were the worst team in nfl history last year. stafford to johnson will not fix that by itself

[The Leaper]

I'll give it a B for the reason that some others have mentioned...we got 2 very strong players who can probably make a relative quick impact, but there is very little past that.

Raji = A
Matthews = B+ simply because of the price we had to pay, although it was a bold and necessary move IMO
The rest = C+ filled need areas with reasonable enough talent, but nothing really noteworthy

[Badgerinmaine]

I'd vote B+--I still wonder if the Packers gave up too much too move up for the Matthews pick.
Two writers have weighed in already with their Packers draft grades:
Larry Weisman, USA Today: B+: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2009-04-26-draft-grades_N.htm
Pete Prisco, CBS Sportsline: B : http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/story/11680126 (he absolutely hated the Matthews trade)

[Badgerinmaine]

Detroit has a long long long way to go. :lol:
What, you don't think their logo revision is going to be enough?
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Avis=C4&Dato=20090420&Kategori=SPORTS01&Lopenr=904200803&Ref=PH&Profile=1049&SectionCat=SPORTS
:lol: :lol:

[Badgerinmaine]

Or this Lions story is even better:
"Against their judgment, Lions fans believe"
http://www.freep.com/article/20090424/SPORTS01/904240393

[Maxie the Taxi]

Definitely an "A."

We got big up front. We got aggressive up front. We got a bunch of kids on the rise with good attitudes and work ethics. What better could be done?

Consider the alternative...a couple of big-name, hot-dog speed rushers with tender ankles and knees.

And as far as Michael Crabtree goes, we got a guy who's ten times better than Crabtree: Andy Brodell, Iowa. Andy grew up in Iowa and I'll bet he grew up a Packer fan. He's another Jordy Nelson, a midwestern version of Percy Harvin.

[Waldo]

I don't want to assign a grade, however my thoughts on the picks:

Raji - I think that he's a project at NT, but super talented and definitely has the physical ability to be one of the best. 4-3 looks of Kamp-Raji-Pickett-Jenkins will probably be difficult to run on.

Clay - One of my favorite players in the draft for us. Great pick. I thought he was a darkhorse for us to take at #9. I think that he's the first player in TT's tenure that he fell in love with.

Lang - Lang was my favorite lineman in the draft. I think the choice of him speaks volumes about what our plans are on the line, by their actions I think that we see that Colledge is going to be Clifton's successor, as I expect that an interior of Lang-Spitz-Sitton is where we want to go. Lang is an absolutely perfect fit in GB, he is practically a Josh Sitton clone, but a little better pass blocker.

Johnson - Can't argue with a sledgehammer. I thought that Fiammetta was a little better fit, but our FB's were no more than mediocre, and due an upgrade. Johnson is a crushing lead blocker. With Lang and Johnson TT took big steps to running the ball better. The first 4 picks I thought were some of the most physical players out there. Real hard nosed guys.

Meredith - Not a huge fan, but he's a good fit for what we do. I think that he has a good shot to be one of our long term tackles. At worst he's an upgrade to Moll. Can't complain.

Wynn - 'eh, whatever. We needed another guy to add to the DE mix, one with PS eligibility, as none of ours have any. I doubt that he makes the team as a rookie.

Underwood - Bye, bye Bush. A steal where we got him.

Jones - Never heard of him. Highlight tapes and measureables bear out that he's a rocket. I think that he'll have a K. Burnett role for us, deep back up most of the LB positions, possibly even SS too. ST demon. Competition for Hunter's roster spot.

[Joemailman]

Getting Lang and Meredith in the 4th and 5th rounds made it easier for me to get over the picks we traded away to get Matthews. The run on defensive backs and wide receivers in round 3 played right into the Packers hands as it dropped the big guys lower. I'm also thinking that maybe Johnson will finally enable me to stop missing William Henderson. We'll see.

[Packnut]

I predict Underwood will be TT's first bonafide late rd gem.

[sheepshead]

I dont think taking a wait-and-see position is what the poll is meant to divulge. All drafts need a wait and see period.

[mraynrand]

I give it a http://www.eveandersson.com/general-comments/attachment/1779/pi.gif

[Patler]

I just hope BJ's highlight reel is comparable to the Crabs

Mark my words. Crabtree will be a major disappointment.

Man among boys; once they get a QB dude is a star

I would have a lot of concerns with drafting at #9 a WR who has had a pin inserted into his foot and has not yet really tested it. If I was drafting for a team without significant needs, he is certainly worth the risk, but I would hate to pass on only slightly lesser talents that match the positions of need to make perhaps the strongest position on the team even stronger.

[LL2]

I would give the draft a A-, not that I now anything. We are all armchair GM's. I give the A- because TT addressed probably the biggest needs on defense and got good players. Defense was a bigger need than offense. Crabtree would've been nice, but if your team can't stop the other team on offense what good is it to have the best WR. GB is pretty good at WR anyways and they can always upgrade there. I'm glad to here some of you really like Lang, as the OL needs help too.

Now I can't wait until the OTA's and training camp!

[HarveyWallbangers]

Not that it matters, but Kiper gave the Packers his top grade and McShay loved their draft also.

Kiper:


I love what this team did to solidify its shaky defense in the first two picks alone, with the selection of two excellent players in defensive tackle B.J. Raji and outside linebacker Clay Matthews. Tackle T.J. Lang was a good pickup for the offensive line, while Quinn Johnson could be a bruising lead fullback in the league. Sixth-round pick Brandon Underwood could make this team and give the Packers depth as a backup.

McShay:


Best pick: DT B.J. Raji, Boston College (First round, No. 9 overall)

Worst pick: FB Quinn Johnson, LSU (Fifth round, No. 145 overall)

Bottom line: It's hard to pinpoint a weakness in this draft. Raji is a perfect fit at NT as the Packers transition to a 3-4 defense, and OLB Clay Matthews gives them a player with experience in a hybrid 3-4/4-3 scheme. OT T.J. Lang is one of the most underrated offensive linemen in this year's class and could emerge as yet another midround O-line starter for Green Bay. The Packers also took some chances in the later rounds on risk/reward players like G Jamon Meredith and CB Brandon Underwood.

[Lurker64]

When your "worst pick" is a fullback and you're the Green Bay Packers (one of the few remaining teams that actually make use of the traditional FB), that's not bad.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Only A given by Charles Robinson of Yahoo is to the Packers.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AuU0wKjQ2OGJlsSEQVGjQQpDubYF?slug=cr-09nfcdraftgrades042709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns]


Positives: Raji, Matthews, tackle prospects

Negative: Could have used a more highly rated cornerback.

Bottom line: A. Almost all the team needs were addressed in some way. Nose tackles in the 3-4 scheme are at a premium, and the Packers had a great one fall in their lap in Raji. Matthews has a ton of versatility and adds another badly needed piece in the Packers’ scheme change on defense. The two tackle prospects are something to work with long term.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Prisco gave the class a B. I'm not sure what I think of these good grades.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/story/11680126


Best pick: They had to get a power player inside and took B.J. Raji in the first round. He is a load.

Questionable move: Trading back into the first round to get USC linebacker Clay Matthews. I didn't like that move at all. He's good. Not that good.

Second-day gem: Landing tackle Jamon Meredith in the fifth round could prove to be a steal for a team in need of a tackle.

Ted Thompson added some nice players, but I think the Matthews move is questionable.

[HarveyWallbangers]

This is kind of nice.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9501416

After the second round, he listed guys that are on the board that shouldn't be.


Five Guys Still On the Board That Shouldn't Be

# Michael Johnson, Georgia Tech, DE (19th overall in 7 Round Mock Draft)
# Jarron Gilbert, San Jose State, DE (31st overall in 7 Round Mock Draft)
# Jamon Meredith, South Carolina, OT (37th overall in 7 Round Mock Draft)
# Jared Cook, South Carolina, TE (42nd overall in 7 Round Mock Draft)
# Mike Mickens, Cincinnati, CB (49th overall in 7 Round Mock Draft)


162. Green Bay — Jamon Meredith, OT, South Carolina and 163. Carolina — Duke Robinson, G, Oklahoma

Here are two guys just about everyone had going in the second or third round of this draft. And yet, on Draft weekend, both kids slip all the way to the middle of the fifth round — going back to back at 162nd and 163rd overall. With such a priority on skilled offensive linemen in the past few years, seeing these two slip so far is pretty confounding.

[Joemailman]

I wonder why McShay is so down on the Johnson pick. I love that pick. I think the Packers just become a tougher short yardage running team. Also, like Matthews and Jones, he is a standout on special teams.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I wonder why McShay is so down on the Johnson pick. I love that pick. I think the Packers just become a tougher short yardage running team. Also, like Matthews and Jones, he is a standout on special teams.

Not sure he's that down. I think he had to pick one for each team, and he said it was hard to find a weakness with their draft. However, looking at projections, many had him more as a 5th round pick. Kind of interesting. I was looking at the SI grades (couldn't find them), but they had Lang projected as a 2nd/3rd round pick, Meredith as a 2nd round pick, and Underwood as 3rd round pick. Those are good. They had Wynn as an undrafted player. I would pick him as the worst pick, but they do have a need for a 3-4 DE and his best football seems to be ahead of him. I'm guessing he'll disappoint the most though. He's my most likely to get cut.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm getting a bit worried. Sporting News gives them an A-.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=542934


Green Bay Packers: A-minus

They targeted defensive help and got it. Defensive tackle B.J. Raji is a run-stuffer with agility, and outside linebacker Clay Matthews is excellent in pass coverage. Both might start in Week 1. Tackle T.J. Lang and fullback Quinn Johnson are physical blockers. This team should be improved.

[LL2]

I don't remember draft grades from previous years too well, but I do not remember a year when many of the draft experts gave the Pack A's. Now hopefully Raji and Matthews turn into A prospect and help the Pack defense become a top 10 defense.

[HarveyWallbangers]

USA Today with a B+. Fan voting gave the Packers the best draft on the USA Today website.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2009-04-26-draft-grades_N.htm


GRADE: B+

• Green Bay Packers: Shift to 3-4 dictated first two picks and they should be good ones. DT B.J. Raji will be the interior space-eater. He's 6-1, 323 pounds and uses leverage well. Acquired another No. 1 pick to get OLB Clay Matthews. He could start on the weak side. Other crying need was at OT, where Mark Tauscher and Chad Clifton both come off surgeries and are heading into sunset years. T.J. Lang brings size and a mauler's attitude.

[Pack-man]

Gotta be on paper TT best draft to date.

[Guiness]

It's the realization that we got a player that filled a need, AND was arguably the BPA with the Raji pick - then filled another need with a guy who was taken right around where he should've been with Mathews.

The Pack and TT are getting credit for filling needs without reaching.

[wist43]

It must be an A. It made wist happy...

LOL...

Yes, I give it an A... just for Raji :)

Haven't really had time to look at the second day much, but from little I've seen, I like day two as well...

Was shocked, shocked I tell you, that TT pulled the trigger on Raji... big time player, that filled a major need.

Believe it or not, I actually have hope now :cow:

[HarveyWallbangers]

A- here.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AuK7BcawsIwZ_xgzM.QjR5OG2bYF?slug=gradin gthenfldraftfourat&prov=tsn&type=lgns


Green Bay Packers: A-minus

They targeted defensive help and got it. Defensive tackle B.J. Raji is a run-stuffer with agility, and outside linebacker Clay Matthews is excellent in pass coverage. Both might start in Week 1. Tackle T.J. Lang and fullback Quinn Johnson are physical blockers. This team should be improved.

[KYPack]

Guess I'm with DD here.

Looks good, but let's wait until we see some on field indicators, eh?

B, but well could be an A.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Numbers, for those that are interested.

90 B.J. Raji
52 Clay Matthews
70 T.J. Lang
45 Quinn Johnson
69 Jamon Meredith
94 Jarius Wynn
33 Brandon Underwood
59 Brad Jones

29 Anthony Smith
60 Duke Preston

[mraynrand]

Numbers, for those that are interested.

90 B.J. Raji
52 Clay Matthews
70 T.J. Lang
45 Quinn Johnson
69 Jamon Meredith
94 Jarius Wynn
33 Brandon Underwood
59 Brad Jones

29 Anthony Smith
60 Duke Preston

I guess Hunter has 57, like dear old dad, but why not 47 for Clay III? It's got to some lame ass NFL rule (only RBs and Safeties can have 4X)

http://por-img.cimcontent.net/api/assets/bin-200903/bfda4ba9d64355d4de50abcd4a6152f2.jpg

[Badgerinmaine]

[quote="mraynrand"]
I guess Hunter has 57, like dear old dad, but why not 47 for Clay III? It's got to some lame ass NFL rule (only RBs and Safeties can have 4X)
[\quote]

20-49 belong to running backs and all defensive backs:
http://www.jt-sw.com/football/pro/index.nsf/Documents/0-jers-nums
The argument I've heard before is that having numbers associated with specific positions makes it easier on the referees in keeping track of formations, etc. It would seem that's why they announce the number of a player with a number not normally given to a tight end reporting as an eligible receiver. I don't feel strongly about it either way. In any case, he can make a name fore himself with his own number. The story's told that Kirby Puckett wanted Willie Mays' number (24) when he came up to the Twins, but someone else had it (I think it was Tom Brunansky), so he took 34. and now that number is forever associated in Minnesota with Puckett (right down to the team address, which is 34 Kirby Puckett Place).

[mission]

Was shocked, shocked I tell you, that TT pulled the trigger on Raji:

LOL me too! When Goodell came up with the pick, I kept saying to myself "dont start with an M, don't start with an M" ... I was waiting for that first sound out of his mouth.

It's not that I would have been against it, it's more that I know BJ Raji is a much bigger need for this team and I honestly don't feel he has any bust potential. After I saw him push that lineman or fullback back into the RB against ND, I was sold 100%. We need a guy who can destroy the pocket even if he's not the one making the play. Disruption is key!

[Charles Woodson]

I give this draft an A because of the needs it filled. It shored up our D-Line which was a huge problem last year. Hopefully we can get constant pressure like this with raji and pickett. I have no problem with the Matthews pick because someone brought up the good point of, imo were not in rebuilding mode any more. Ted has done a good job of filling the roster and were at the point where you take people who are going to work with your system. I think matthews was better than anyone we could have gotten.

[Deputy Nutz]

This is the part of the draft that is totally stupid. Give a draft a grade? How because the filled some needs? What a joke, I will grade it three years from now. Giving it an "A" because you recognize a name or two also doesn't make any sense.

I give all 32 teams an "Incomplete." More work to be done, like playing football at the NFL level.

[mission]

This is the part of the draft that is totally stupid. Give a draft a grade? How because the filled some needs? What a joke, I will grade it three years from now. Giving it an "A" because you recognize a name or two also doesn't make any sense.

I give all 32 teams an "Incomplete." More work to be done, like playing football at the NFL level.

So it's not fair to call Al Davis a jackass based on this draft? (obviously we've been doing it awhile now already)

[MJZiggy]

There are so many things to call Al Davis a jackass for, why limit yourself?

[Lurker64]

This is the part of the draft that is totally stupid. Give a draft a grade? How because the filled some needs? What a joke, I will grade it three years from now. Giving it an "A" because you recognize a name or two also doesn't make any sense.

I give all 32 teams an "Incomplete." More work to be done, like playing football at the NFL level.

The real meaning of "draft grades" as given by fans of a team is not so much an objective measure of how much better the team is going to be as a result of the draft, but as a subjective measure of a fan's level of satisfaction with the results of their team's draft.

If your team drafts players you hate in every single round, it's fair to call that an F since it's just so terribly disappointing. If your team drafts players you really like in every round, it's fair to call that an A since it's terribly exciting. Not that the A draft is really going to be better four years from now than the F draft, but some drafts make fans happier than others.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The consensus for best drafts ended up being: 1) Eagles, 2) Patriots, 3a) Packers, 3b) Jets, 5) Giants.

http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/story?id=4104114

The last time the experts thought we had a strong draft was 2006, and that did turn out right, so we'll see. It's not automatically a jinx.
:D