IS IT TIME TO PUT UNTOUCHABLE TED ON TRIAL ? HOW DO YOU GRADE HIM ??

[Bretsky]

Listening to the Packer Beat writers they often note that TT and MM are untouchable in Green Bay. They can't fathom Mark Murphy ever making a strong move and feel Untouchable Ted has a lifetime contract in Green Bay.

I'm calling out the creative Rat thinkers and asking them to Grade Ted Thompson's work in say the past 5 years.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out a healthy AROD will get us 8 wins a year and make the players around him way better than they would be without AROD.

We have the best player in the NFL and TT gets great credit for drafting him 12 years ago.

But the NFL stands for Not For Long.

It's time for us to judge Ted on his work in the past 5-7 years. Many could argue we have the best player in the game and we're wasting his best years.

No Pro Bowlers. Quite a rarity and almost hard to do. And our alterate is a frickin fullback that probably plays less then half the snaps.

Cliffy Cristl must be puking at this roster when trying to grade out the number of impact players we have. And yes, much of that falls on Untouchable Ted.

It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out we needed SEVERE help last year at OLB. And many noted how deep secondary players were in the NFL Draft and how pass rushers were at a premium. I don't need to go back here, but after neglecting the pass rushing needs again, we fail to address it in free agency either. Please don't argue Beigel..who I loved as a Badger....he might help some day but not even the biggest Badger fan expected from Vinnie what Pittsburg got from Watt this season.

It would be intereting to really dissect the past 5 drafts with Untouchable Ted; but bottom line is WHERE ARE THE PLAYMAKERS ?

So are we winning because of Ted Thompson, or despite Ted Thompson ?

Is this roster full of future playmakers, or are we one superstar and a few good players and a bunch of JAGS ?

DEAR RATS, GRADE UNTOUCHABLE TED ................AND PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGY FOR ONLY ONE CREATED POLL TODAY

[mraynrand]

TT gets an F from me for "Failure to prevent injuries"

[Bretsky]

TT gets an F from me for "Failure to prevent injuries"

This is not meant to be a this year poll.

If injuries are to blame then vote for TT getting an A or a B.

[Bretsky]

I'm holding my vote and pondering; I would undoubtedly NOT give TT an A or an F. And y'all know I've been calling for Eliott Wolf four over a year now.

[Freak Out]

He gets a C grade. He's hit a few dingers...but he's grounded into a fuck ton of double plays

[denverYooper]

TT gets an F from me for "Failure to prevent injuries"

INJURY PRONE!!!

[denverYooper]

5 years draft only.

Pro Bowl/All pro:
Casey Hayward, Mike Daniels 2012
Eddie Lacy, David Bakhtiari, Micah Hyde 2013
HHCD 2014

Good but no pro-bowl yet:
Nick Perry 2012
Davante Adams, Corey Linsley 2014
Damarious Randall 2015
Kenny Clark, Blake Martinez 2016
Kevin King, Josh Jones, Jamaal Williams, Aaron Jones 2017

Any of the guys in the second group could go to a pro bowl with some good team seasons over the next few years.

[Bretsky]

5 years draft only.

Pro Bowl/All pro:
Casey Hayward, Mike Daniels 2012
Eddie Lacy, David Bakhtiari, Micah Hyde 2013
HHCD 2014



Good but no pro-bowl yet:
Nick Perry 2012
Davante Adams, Corey Linsley 2014
Damarious Randall 2015
Kenny Clark, Blake Martinez 2016
Kevin King, Josh Jones, Jamaal Williams, Aaron Jones 2017

Any of the guys in the second group could go to a pro bowl with some good team seasons over the next few years.



Just doing the Math....considering how many picks we end up with each year

When you had them that has to be a lot of misses

and

No real playmakers to be found on a GB roster at this point.

Maybe these guys get there; Fresno Freak seems to have a shot.

But the untouchable one should have a N.F.L. attached to him if things don't improve

[Bossman641]

He's in B- to B territory. Will depend on how the young guys progress.

[gbgary]

considering his whole body of work...C. pretty average on talent eval (although he was smart enough not to pass on Rodgers who has masked so many issues with his greatness), kept the team far away from cap problems but that is a double edged sword, well below average on free agency use and impact, and ignored the thought of keeping an experienced back-up for Rodgers. will be in the Packers HOF (maybe the nfl hof) for the one superbowl.

[red]

I don’t see how he can be above average

[mraynrand]

I don’t see how he can be above average

Why not? I see him as one of the top 5 in the NFL, just based on bottom line.

[red]

Why not? I see him as one of the top 5 in the NFL, just based on bottom line.

0 pro bowlers this year

team exposed as being complete shit only able to beat botom dwellers in OT without #12

when our roster was compared to the browns without rodgers, thats not a good thing. then when we needed OT to beat that browns team who has one exactly 1 game in 2 years, with the healthiest team that we've had in 2 or 3 seasons, that wasn't good either

someone up above wanted to give TT credit for drafting 2 pro bowlers in hyde and hayward. it needs to be noted that neither were pro bowlers until after TT let them walk from green bay

he drafted a very good QB right off the bat. since then, he has managed to draft a average to below average team to go with that QB

he has also sat on his hands while M3 has been allowed to keep the tire fire that is capers on the coaching staff. not sure if thats TT's call or murphy's

[Joemailman]

0 pro bowlers this year

team exposed as being complete shit only able to beat botom dwellers in OT without #12

when our roster was compared to the browns without rodgers, thats not a good thing. then when we needed OT to beat that browns team who has one exactly 1 game in 2 years, with the healthiest team that we've had in 2 or 3 seasons, that wasn't good either

someone up above wanted to give TT credit for drafting 2 pro bowlers in hyde and hayward. it needs to be noted that neither were pro bowlers until after TT let them walk from green bay

he drafted a very good QB right off the bat. since then, he has managed to draft a average to below average team to go with that QB

he has also sat on his hands while M3 has been allowed to keep the tire fire that is capers on the coaching staff. not sure if thats TT's call or murphy's

Don't you think that maybe that points to the real problem being the defensive coaching staff, and not so much TT's acquisition of talent? If TT had paid them, would they have blossomed into Pro Bowlers, or would they be overpaid role players due to the failings of the Capers. I think the latter.

[mraynrand]

0 pro bowlers this year

team exposed as being complete shit only able to beat botom dwellers in OT without #12

when our roster was compared to the browns without rodgers, thats not a good thing. then when we needed OT to beat that browns team who has one exactly 1 game in 2 years, with the healthiest team that we've had in 2 or 3 seasons, that wasn't good either

someone up above wanted to give TT credit for drafting 2 pro bowlers in hyde and hayward. it needs to be noted that neither were pro bowlers until after TT let them walk from green bay

he drafted a very good QB right off the bat. since then, he has managed to draft a average to below average team to go with that QB

he has also sat on his hands while M3 has been allowed to keep the tire fire that is capers on the coaching staff. not sure if thats TT's call or murphy's


Regardless, his overall performance is better than all but NE and maybe Pittsburgh.

[mraynrand]

I don't give a flying fuck about pro-bowlers. It's a popularity contest anyway. Teams win consistently. Even fair players, with decent coaching can win games. Packers keep winning and draft low all the time. The physical freaks are all gone by the time the Packers draft, yet they keep winning. It really must suck to be so miserable that unless the Packers win the Superbowl, it's all wasted. I actually enjoy the games and the winning. I'd hate to be a fan of at least 25 teams. Idiots like Wist keep thinking the Packers are the Bengals, like they never win a game in the playoffs ("One and done" remember). Marv Lewis can't win a single sucking playoff game, but people bitch and moan about the Packers, calling for firing all the time. BORING. In response to all your clever rejoinders, no, I don't want to win a Super Bowl. Yes, I'm satisfied with playoff losses. Yes, I like failure. So stop asking. Just stop the fucking whining. Or go be a Tampa Bay fan or a Bears fan or a Detroit fan or a 49ers fan or a Dallas fan and tell me how great they're gonna be every year and how they do everything better than the Packers.

[Rutnstrut]

Don't you think that maybe that points to the real problem being the defensive coaching staff, and not so much TT's acquisition of talent? If TT had paid them, would they have blossomed into Pro Bowlers, or would they be overpaid role players due to the failings of the Capers. I think the latter.

This isn't really much of a defense of TT. Most GM's would have forced stubby to fire Capers years ago.

[Rutnstrut]

I don't give a flying fuck about pro-bowlers. It's a popularity contest anyway. Teams win consistently. Even fair players, with decent coaching can win games. Packers keep winning and draft low all the time. The physical freaks are all gone by the time the Packers draft, yet they keep winning. It really must suck to be so miserable that unless the Packers win the Superbowl, it's all wasted. I actually enjoy the games and the winning. I'd hate to be a fan of at least 25 teams. Idiots like Wist keep thinking the Packers are the Bengals, like they never win a game in the playoffs ("One and done" remember). Marv Lewis can't win a single sucking playoff game, but people bitch and moan about the Packers, calling for firing all the time. BORING. In response to all your clever rejoinders, no, I don't want to win a Super Bowl. Yes, I'm satisfied with playoff losses. Yes, I like failure. So stop asking. Just stop the fucking whining. Or go be a Tampa Bay fan or a Bears fan or a Detroit fan or a 49ers fan or a Dallas fan and tell me how great they're gonna be every year and how they do everything better than the Packers.

This is all true but. Other teams don't have the best damn QB in the world. When you have that to build on, you do what's needed to make as many SB runs as possible. No Ted has not done what's needed, he's done what he wanted.

[texaspackerbacker]

My opposition to Ted is well known. The only two reasons I gave him a D and not an F is that line about getting rid of Capers, which I think would be stupid, and the fact that Ted did draft Aaron Rodgers.

The argument that we draft so low every year doesn't hold water. There are a few other teams in that situation who do a lot better, and there are players drafted below the first round who turn out to be star quality. Given the mediocrity of the Packers roster other than Aaron Rodgers, I can't see how even those less opposed to Ted could give him better than a C grade, as the supporting cast for Aaron Rodgers is at very best, average, and probably way below average.

[call_me_ishmael]

In the past 5 years, he has found one superstar (Bahktiari). That says it all. He scores a D. The team's record is very good, but that is largely due to players acquired outside of the 5 year window.

[bobblehead]

I don’t see how he can be above average

NFCC 3 of last 4 years. Perennial playoff team. 3rd winningest team in NFL over last 10 years. Has spawned 3 successful top 10 GMs into the league. Started out with the foundation by hiring a head coach that is a top notch QB coach, then drafting and developing a top 5 QB all time despite fans calling for his head when he turned the page on Brent. Consistently drafts in the bottom 5-6 spots of the round but still puts a winner on the field.

I drop him to a B for not insisting on "retiring" Dom. Also, both he and MM have not adjusted to the very limited practice time allowed by NFL rules and gone to a veteran backup to ARod instead of trying to develop a young talent.

How he is above average?? Well, results alone tell you that he is WAY above average since its 100% his roster and team. If you google top 5 GMs in NFL I would bet he is on every layman's list.

[bobblehead]

This isn't really much of a defense of TT. Most GM's would have forced stubby to fire Capers years ago.

You have interviewed most GMs?

[bobblehead]

This is all true but. Other teams don't have the best damn QB in the world. When you have that to build on, you do what's needed to make as many SB runs as possible. No Ted has not done what's needed, he's done what he wanted.

Teams with really good QBs. Chargers, Saints, Chiefs, Raiders, Steelers, Panthers, Falcons.

I'll take zero or one superbowl wins in the last 10 years for $500 Alex.

Teams with multiple superbowl wins. Patriots, Giants. So Tom Coughlin and Bill Bellicek are the only guys more successful than TT based on SB wins and Only the cheater is overall more successful. I won't even get started about TT building the Seahawks team that Holmgren took to the super bowl with an average QB.

[bobblehead]

My opposition to Ted is well known. The only two reasons I gave him a D and not an F is that line about getting rid of Capers, which I think would be stupid, and the fact that Ted did draft Aaron Rodgers.

The argument that we draft so low every year doesn't hold water. There are a few other teams in that situation who do a lot better, and there are players drafted below the first round who turn out to be star quality. Given the mediocrity of the Packers roster other than Aaron Rodgers, I can't see how even those less opposed to Ted could give him better than a C grade, as the supporting cast for Aaron Rodgers is at very best, average, and probably way below average.

There is exactly ONE team in that situation who does better.

[bobblehead]

If you forced TT and MM to start rebuilding right now without ARod, how long before they put a consistent winner on the field? I was grumpy when Arod went down and Hundly was completely inept. I blame them for that and Capers. That team still went 3-4 though and that isn't horseshit. We get 2 more games to judge by.

[hoosier]

I don't give a flying fuck about pro-bowlers. It's a popularity contest anyway. Teams win consistently. Even fair players, with decent coaching can win games. Packers keep winning and draft low all the time. The physical freaks are all gone by the time the Packers draft, yet they keep winning. It really must suck to be so miserable that unless the Packers win the Superbowl, it's all wasted. I actually enjoy the games and the winning. I'd hate to be a fan of at least 25 teams. Idiots like Wist keep thinking the Packers are the Bengals, like they never win a game in the playoffs ("One and done" remember). Marv Lewis can't win a single sucking playoff game, but people bitch and moan about the Packers, calling for firing all the time. BORING. In response to all your clever rejoinders, no, I don't want to win a Super Bowl. Yes, I'm satisfied with playoff losses. Yes, I like failure. So stop asking. Just stop the fucking whining. Or go be a Tampa Bay fan or a Bears fan or a Detroit fan or a 49ers fan or a Dallas fan and tell me how great they're gonna be every year and how they do everything better than the Packers.

Finally Rand talks some sense.

[pbmax]

Teams with really good QBs. Chargers, Saints, Chiefs, Raiders, Steelers, Panthers, Falcons.

I'll take zero or one superbowl wins in the last 10 years for $500 Alex.

Teams with multiple superbowl wins. Patriots, Giants. So Tom Coughlin and Bill Bellicek are the only guys more successful than TT based on SB wins and Only the cheater is overall more successful. I won't even get started about TT building the Seahawks team that Holmgren took to the super bowl with an average QB.

Jerry Reese, but I get ya.

[mraynrand]

Finally Rand talks some sense.

https://cbsnews1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2011/04/09/09ed6e1b-a643-11e2-a3f0-029118418759/thumbnail/620x350/18ab36450c551d55bed06e50b07d87cb/network_promo.jpg

[red]

If you forced TT and MM to start rebuilding right now without ARod, how long before they put a consistent winner on the field? I was grumpy when Arod went down and Hundly was completely inept. I blame them for that and Capers. That team still went 3-4 though and that isn't horseshit. We get 2 more games to judge by.
Those 3 wins came against 3 of me he 5 worst teams in the nfl this year. We got very lucky with the schedule

For a full season without a-rod this is realistically a 4-12 or 5-11 team

[texaspackerbacker]

There is exactly ONE team in that situation who does better.

I assume the one team you mean is the Patriots, but I'd say the Seahawks, Panthers, Broncos, and Steelers haven't been far from the top or drafted very high for quite a while also, and all of them have built better a lot better teams than the Packers minus Aaron Rodgers. And you can add to that probably half a dozen more teams that either only had one down year (the Cowboys) or stayed middle of the pack and seldom drafted very high (the Vikings and Falcons).

Somebody said Bakhtiari is a superstar? Come on!

I reject the idea that Hundley was the reason for the team dropping off without Rodgers. Hundley was fairly decent; It just was the O Line, the receivers, and most of the D that were exposed as so mediocre.

[mraynrand]

Those 3 wins came against 3 of me he 5 worst teams in the nfl this year. We got very lucky with the schedule

For a full season without a-rod this is realistically a 4-12 or 5-11 team

Maybe a full season where he gets injured game 1. Maybe. You don't know that the team wouldn't make a move if they thought he was gone for the year. Maybe the Packers make the trade with NE for Crappola.

[mraynrand]

I assume the one team you mean is the Patriots, but I'd say the Seahawks, Panthers, Broncos, and Steelers haven't been far from the top or drafted very high for quite a while also, and all of them have built better a lot better teams than the Packers minus Aaron Rodgers.

Idiotic take. Take away Wilson, and Seattle maybe has 1-2 wins.

[texaspackerbacker]

Idiotic take. Take away Wilson, and Seattle maybe has 1-2 wins.

His point was the fallacy that drafting low was the excuse for the Packers mediocrity other than Rodgers. My point is Seattle also has drafted pretty low for a long time - along with those others.

Surely you wouldn't suggest that Russell Wilson is even close to Aaron Rodgers quality - would you? And surely you wouldn't suggest the Packers overall talent level other than QB is anywhere near Seattle's - would you?

[3irty1]

I'm not a mob and pitch fork guy. If heads roll I'd like to see it done with calculation as I don't think its ever so simple as addition by subtraction. Most fans tend to blame everything on every level of management which is not occam's razor enough for me to find compelling. In the whos-head-should-roll calculus, Ted is the easiest for me to overlook. He's got the best track record of them all and his old students have spread his success elsewhere. If I were going to roll only one head, and I do prefer the systematic approach of incremental changes over violent revolutions, Ted would be my last choice. We have less to lose with Capers.

[mraynrand]

His point was the fallacy that drafting low was the excuse for the Packers mediocrity other than Rodgers. My point is Seattle also has drafted pretty low for a long time - along with those others....And surely you wouldn't suggest the Packers overall talent level other than QB is anywhere near Seattle's - would you?

They have holes all over their roster. And they have missing draft picks due to trades to fill current holes trying to win this season. I like some of their individual players better than the same position guy on the Packers, but it's a team sport, and the Packers team is better constructed.



Surely you wouldn't suggest that Russell Wilson is even close to Aaron Rodgers quality - would you?

Wilson's value to his team is obvious to anyone who has watched their games. I'd take Rodgers over Wilson, but Wilson is an amazing talent, and the Seachickens would be toast without him - as would almost any team with a great QB.

[pbmax]

I think the call comes down to McCarthy. He has adjusted his offense to draft and develop. Sure, he has tuned the offense to Rodgers to the nth degree, but only a fool and Belichick wouldn't. And he gets Stubby when he has to alter the offense for Hundley, which he should have known after three years.

But there is a more severe disconnect on defense between Dom and the younger players. Mike the 3rd needs to figure that out. Ted isn't going to be able to call that one EXCEPT to insist Capers be gone. If its Perry, or Whitt or the complexity of the weekly game plan, something needs to change and it isn't the damn camp practice schedule.

Even if those individuals are excellent, everyone has a shortcoming. They may need a different messenger as a position coach OR a new designer.

If this year happened in the previous two, I would be more apt to look at personnel. But outside of pass rush, there is a fair amount of untapped talent on defense. Unfortunately, the best new piece (King) is on IT. EDIT And by that, I mean he is volunteering to help the IT department while on IR. The second best new piece (Jones) is an unorthodox safety being asked to be the most orthodox safety role.

[Smidgeon]

Idiotic take. Take away Wilson, and Seattle maybe has 1-2 wins.

Right now even with Russell Wilson, the Seahawks aren't in the playoffs. They need other teams to lose to get in, specifically the NFC South teams.

[mraynrand]

I think the call comes down to McCarthy. He has adjusted his offense to draft and develop. Sure, he has tuned the offense to Rodgers to the nth degree, but only a fool and Belichick wouldn't. And he gets Stubby when he has to alter the offense for Hundley, which he should have known after three years.

But there is a more severe disconnect on defense between Dom and the younger players. Mike the 3rd needs to figure that out. Ted isn't going to be able to call that one EXCEPT to insist Capers be gone. If its Perry, or Whitt or the complexity of the weekly game plan, something needs to change and it isn't the damn camp practice schedule.

Even if those individuals are excellent, everyone has a shortcoming. They may need a different messenger as a position coach OR a new designer.

If this year happened in the previous two, I would be more apt to look at personnel. But outside of pass rush, there is a fair amount of untapped talent on defense. Unfortunately, the best new piece (King) is on IT. EDIT And by that, I mean he is volunteering to help the IT department while on IR. The second best new piece (Jones) is an unorthodox safety being asked to be the most orthodox safety role.


King...IT...we know what you meant.

[Bretsky]

I don't give a flying fuck about pro-bowlers. .


When we're grading out TT we're talking about building a roster around the best QB in the NFL
Don't buy the popularity contests ? The numbers support who makes the Pro Bowl. Which Green Bay Packer deserves to be there and what player was he better than this year ?

[Bretsky]

considering his whole body of work...C. pretty average on talent eval (although he was smart enough not to pass on Rodgers who has masked so many issues with his greatness), kept the team far away from cap problems but that is a double edged sword, well below average on free agency use and impact, and ignored the thought of keeping an experienced back-up for Rodgers. will be in the Packers HOF (maybe the nfl hof) for the one superbowl.


This is where I'm leaning.
If we had an elite GM I think AROD and the talent the GM delivered would have led to more than one Super Bowl

[Bretsky]

Regardless, his overall performance is better than all but NE and maybe Pittsburgh.

NE is a no brainer; if you take the QB out (AROD is far superior to Big Ben) I think the talent around PItt is far better than what we have in GB when everybody is healthy.

All healthy and taking the QB out I think Seattle has more talent as well.

But I think AROD is really by himself in masking deficiencies on offense. Unfortunately on defense we don't have that player.

We're soft....part of that is for sure on DOM....but what player on defense scares the opposition ? Prolly none.

Stat wise our defense is just sickening. TWO sacks in the 4th quarter...HORRID.....Red Zone defense...31st.....Opposing QB rating...320th....Opposing QB completion % 31st

THINK PASS RUSH SHOULD HAVE BEEN A FOCUS LAST YEAR ? That's on ThanksTed

Now all the dam confusion as snaps are occurring...and the huge plays due to missed assignments.....that's on DOM

[beveaux1]

I assume the one team you mean is the Patriots, but I'd say the Seahawks, Panthers, Broncos, and Steelers haven't been far from the top or drafted very high for quite a while also, and all of them have built better a lot better teams than the Packers minus Aaron Rodgers. And you can add to that probably half a dozen more teams that either only had one down year (the Cowboys) or stayed middle of the pack and seldom drafted very high (the Vikings and Falcons).

Somebody said Bakhtiari is a superstar? Come on!

I reject the idea that Hundley was the reason for the team dropping off without Rodgers. Hundley was fairly decent; It just was the O Line, the receivers, and most of the D that were exposed as so mediocre.

In the last 7 drafts, this was the order that each of the teams mentioned was supposed to draft based on their record of the previous year:

[Bretsky]

Teams with really good QBs. Chargers, Saints, Chiefs, Raiders, Steelers, Panthers, Falcons.

I'll take zero or one superbowl wins in the last 10 years for $500 Alex.

Teams with multiple superbowl wins. Patriots, Giants. So Tom Coughlin and Bill Bellicek are the only guys more successful than TT based on SB wins and Only the cheater is overall more successful. I won't even get started about TT building the Seahawks team that Holmgren took to the super bowl with an average QB.


I don't think you can put many of those QB's in the same class as Rodgers. Rodger and Brady....GB and NE.....have elite QB's

the rest are good

[Bretsky]

Idiotic take. Take away Wilson, and Seattle maybe has 1-2 wins.


Not buying this; Seattle's defense is decimated with injuries

Take AROD and Russell out of the picture and assume everybody is healthy. Seattle's roster measures up to GB's just fine

[Bretsky]

I think the call comes down to McCarthy. He has adjusted his offense to draft and develop. Sure, he has tuned the offense to Rodgers to the nth degree, but only a fool and Belichick wouldn't. And he gets Stubby when he has to alter the offense for Hundley, which he should have known after three years.

But there is a more severe disconnect on defense between Dom and the younger players. Mike the 3rd needs to figure that out. Ted isn't going to be able to call that one EXCEPT to insist Capers be gone. If its Perry, or Whitt or the complexity of the weekly game plan, something needs to change and it isn't the damn camp practice schedule.

Even if those individuals are excellent, everyone has a shortcoming. They may need a different messenger as a position coach OR a new designer.

If this year happened in the previous two, I would be more apt to look at personnel. But outside of pass rush, there is a fair amount of untapped talent on defense. Unfortunately, the best new piece (King) is on IT. EDIT And by that, I mean he is volunteering to help the IT department while on IR. The second best new piece (Jones) is an unorthodox safety being asked to be the most orthodox safety role.


This is why we have to seize the opportunity to go 7-9, but a top 12 pick....refuel with an elite defensive player (Mosley or Shazier like) that we never have a shot of cause AROD carries out asses to so many wins....restock, and win the dam Super Bowl next year !!

[pbmax]

When we're grading out TT we're talking about building a roster around the best QB in the NFL
Don't buy the popularity contests ? The numbers support who makes the Pro Bowl. Which Green Bay Packer deserves to be there and what player was he better than this year ?

Bach, Adams, Linsley, Clark and Ponch plus Janis on special teams.

But more to the overall point, Pro Bowls go to teams with currently remarkable seasons. Without Rodgers, everyone else gets downgraded due to record and less exposure.

[ThunderDan]

When we're grading out TT we're talking about building a roster around the best QB in the NFL
Don't buy the popularity contests ? The numbers support who makes the Pro Bowl. Which Green Bay Packer deserves to be there and what player was he better than this year ?

How about Jeff Saturday when he was on the Packers. He made the Pro Bowl and was benched by the Packers that year for horrible play.

[beveaux1]

I assume the one team you mean is the Patriots, but I'd say the Seahawks, Panthers, Broncos, and Steelers haven't been far from the top or drafted very high for quite a while also, and all of them have built better a lot better teams than the Packers minus Aaron Rodgers. And you can add to that probably half a dozen more teams that either only had one down year (the Cowboys) or stayed middle of the pack and seldom drafted very high (the Vikings and Falcons).

Somebody said Bakhtiari is a superstar? Come on!

I reject the idea that Hundley was the reason for the team dropping off without Rodgers. Hundley was fairly decent; It just was the O Line, the receivers, and most of the D that were exposed as so mediocre.

In the last 7 drafts, this was the order that each of the teams mentioned was supposed to draft based on their record of the previous year:

Green Bay Atlanta Dallas Minnesota
2017 29 31 28 14
2016 27 17 4 23
2015 30 8 27 11
2014 21 6 16 9
2013 26 22 18 23
2012 28 22 6 4
2011 32 26 9 12

Other than the Packers, each one of these teams had at least 2 picks in the top 10 during the past 7 years. Only once, last year with the Falcons, did one of these teams draft after the Packers, based on their record. These teams should be doing much better than the Packers based on their position in the draft. The fact that they have not consistently, or even inconsistently played better than the Packers makes the argument that Thompson has , at least, been a good GM.

[pbmax]

If you overestimate Rodgers by even a little, you seem to devalue the rest of the roster in this kind of analysis.

Rodgers has struggled with being All World when his unit has been decimated with injuries. Even if he is 8% better than Brady and Ben, that doesn't make the rest of the unit terrible.

[pbmax]

In the last 7 drafts, this was the order that each of the teams mentioned was supposed to draft based on their record of the previous year:



Other than the Packers, each one of these teams had at least 2 picks in the top 10 during the past 7 years. Only once, last year with the Falcons, did one of these teams draft after the Packers, based on their record. These teams should be doing much better than the Packers based on their position in the draft. The fact that they have not consistently, or even inconsistently played better than the Packers makes the argument that Thompson has , at least, been a good GM.




Green Bay Atlanta Dallas Minnesota
2017 29 31 28 14
2016 27 17 4 23
2015 30 8 27 11
2014 21 6 16 9
2013 26 22 18 23
2012 28 22 6 4
2011 32 26 9 12

[mraynrand]

When we're grading out TT we're talking about building a roster around the best QB in the NFL
Don't buy the popularity contests ? The numbers support who makes the Pro Bowl. Which Green Bay Packer deserves to be there and what player was he better than this year ?

I don’t care. Successful teams have more pro bowlers the next year because people know who they are.

I look at team success and cumulative success. Based on that TT is top 3-4 in the NFL.

[pbmax]

You could basically get Bretsky's or red's preferred player in each year with the differences in average or median of their draft position:



GB Atl Boys Vikes
Avg 27.57 18.86 15.43 13.71
Median 28 22 16 12

[Rutnstrut]

Maybe a full season where he gets injured game 1. Maybe. You don't know that the team wouldn't make a move if they thought he was gone for the year. Maybe the Packers make the trade with NE for Crappola.

That's fucking funny as hell. There is no way TT would make a major move and especially not during the season. He would just get some unheard of guy off the street to add to the PS.

[Smidgeon]

Bach, Adams, Linsley, Clark and Ponch plus Janis on special teams.

But more to the overall point, Pro Bowls go to teams with currently remarkable seasons. Without Rodgers, everyone else gets downgraded due to record and less exposure.

The Packers have always been underrepresented at the Pro Bowl.

[Bretsky]

Bach, Adams, Linsley, Clark and Ponch plus Janis on special teams.

But more to the overall point, Pro Bowls go to teams with currently remarkable seasons. Without Rodgers, everyone else gets downgraded due to record and less exposure.


Who are you saying any of he above was better than ?

With Rodgers, every else gets upgraded due to him carrying us to wins and more national exposure.

That argument can work either way.

I think Adams may be close. Maybe Bach close. The others.....nah...bottom line....how many teams were shut out ?

Also, nobody is that close on the defensive side of the ball at this point.

[Bretsky]

I don’t care. Successful teams have more pro bowlers the next year because people know who they are.

I look at team success and cumulative success. Based on that TT is top 3-4 in the NFL.


I've pretty much felt forever having the best player in the NFL gets us pretty close to 8 wins. By your logic GB has made several nice runs so if you are into the next year theory we should be getting a ton of recognition right now followed by very little next year . Championships; we got one. Go get more TT if you want elevation in my book. He's ok. If he leaves this year I'm fine. With AROD as our QB we're making the playoffs most years. Surround him with better talent and we'll make the Big Show again soon.

[Bretsky]

INTERESTING COMMENTS BY PETE DOUGHERTY....PACKER BEAT WRITER FROM JS......RED MIGHT HAVE BROKEN INTO CHAT....STATED PACKERS ARE A BOTTOM 10 TALENT TEAM outside of QB. FOR THE RECORD I DON"T THINK THEY ARE NEAR BOTTOM 10; from this I'd guess he would give TT a C as well.


I'm not sure if they're bottom 10 in overall talent or not. I mean, it's probably borderline. Bakhtiari is a Pro Bowler even though he didn't get in. Daniels is right there but plays a position that's strong in the NFC. I mean, I get what you're saying, and maybe they are bottom 10. But they might be just a little better than that. I'll be curious to see how Philly does in the playoffs. I know there was a lot said about how good they are overall, and their defense, or at least their defensive front, definitely is better than the Packers.'. But it looked to me like Wentz's improvement was the reason they went from six or whatever wins last year to maybe best team in the NFC this year. I think they're done now that he's done. We'll see.

[beveaux1]

Green Bay Atlanta Dallas Minnesota
2017 29 31 28 14
2016 27 17 4 23
2015 30 8 27 11
2014 21 6 16 9
2013 26 22 18 23
2012 28 22 6 4
2011 32 26 9 12


Thanks, PB. Obviously, charts are not my strong suit.

[call_me_ishmael]

The scope is this question is the past 5 years. What great player has he acquired in the past 5 years? David Bahktiari. That's it.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/dougherty/2017/12/22/dougherty-vikings-getting-better-packers-draft/977791001/

Grading scale:
3 starters, 2 good, 1 average/bad = A (4.0)
3 starters, 1 good, 2 average/bad = B (3.0)
2 starters, 1 good, 1 average/bad = C (2.0)
2 starters, 2 average/bad = D (1.0)
1 starter, 1 good = D (0.0)
1 or less starter, bad = F


2012 - Two second contracts as starter, one good, one average. Draft grade is C due to 2 starters where only is a good player.
Perry - average
Worthy - bad
Hayward - average, gone
Daniels - good
McMillion - bad
Manning - bad
Datko - bad
Coleman - bad

2013 - One second contact as starter, 1 special, no one else note worthy. Draft grade is D due to one starter, albeit the Packers second best player at a key position.
Datone Jones - bad, gone
Eddie Lacy - average, gone
Bakhtiari - special
Tretter - below average, gone
Franklin - bad, gone
Hyde - average, gone
Boyd - bad
Palmer - bad
Johnson - bad
Dorsey - bad
Barrington - bad

2014 - Three (presumably) second contracts as starters, Two good players, one average player. Draft grade is A
Dix - good (historically, down year)
Adams - good
Thorton - bad
Rodgers - below average
Bradford - bad
Linsley - average
Abbrederis - bad
Goodson - bad
Janis - average

Projecting 2015 - Presumably 2-3 second contracts as starter though one is a fullback. Two average players, other show potential but are constantly hurt. Draft grade is C at best. Randall is an average #1 at best (that's being generous). Ripkowski is an average fullback (irrelevant). Ryan is nothing special. Rollins and Monty have potential but are always hurt.
Randall - average
Rollins - bad (so far)
Montgomery - bad (so far)
Ryan - below average
Hundley - average
Ripkowski - average
Ringo - bad
Backman - bad

Projecting 2016 - Presumably 3 starters signed to second contracts as starters. Clark is looking pretty darn good. Martinez and Lowry are average starters at their positions. Draft grade is an B
Clark - good
Spriggs - bad
Fackrell - bad
Martinez - average
Lowry - average
Davis - bad
Murphy - bad

Projecting 2017 - Jury is still out but there is no reason to suspect a star out of this class. There is a lot of starting potential here but we'll see. The jury is still out.
King - good (give him benefit of doubt)
Jones - bad so far, incomplete
Adams - incomplete
Biegel - incomplete
Williams - average
Jones - average
Amichia - bad
Mays - bad


Summary:
GPA - ~2.4 on average

Based on my scale and some basic math, TT's GPA is 2.4 over the past 5 years. That's not very good. It's time to make a change here. Part of it is since 2012 so many of his draftees have been very injury prone. They have the medical info ahead of time so perhaps they're taking too many risks there.

His best draft by far is 2014 with two above average starters and one average one. His worst year was 2013 where there is not a single player still on the squad aside from the excellent Bakhtiari.

[pbmax]

You have no basis for your scale. Either we do the rest of the League and adjust for draft position, or this means little, though I thank you for the all the draft picks in one spot listing.

Your grades are interesting too. Don't see how Jones and Williams grade out to average.

[denverYooper]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRu9xU3UEAA4YRJ.jpg

[pbmax]

Thanks, PB. Obviously, charts are not my strong suit.

It helps to be periodically obsessive and compulsive. Excel and Word help as well.

[Pugger]

The Packers have always been underrepresented at the Pro Bowl.

Yes, even after our SB season we only had 4 players voted in and 3 alternates who ended up participating.

[Pugger]

Man, if this roster is as terrible as some are suggesting here how in the hell do we win any games at all? Rodgers is a generational talent but even he can't do it alone.

[pbmax]

Man, if this roster is as terrible as some are suggesting here how in the hell do we win any games at all? Rodgers is a generational talent but even he can't do it alone.

I'm with her. Philosophically speaking.

[mraynrand]

You have no basis for ----

Lather, rinse, repeat.

[Bretsky]

Man, if this roster is as terrible as some are suggesting here how in the hell do we win any games at all? Rodgers is a generational talent but even he can't do it alone.


I ask this pondering.........when is the last time the best player/QB in this NFL QB League finished below .500 ?

[pbmax]

I ask this pondering.........when is the last time the best player/QB in this NFL QB League finished below .500 ?

Indy and Luck
Indy and Manning
Saints and Brees

The answer to your question is pick the QB MVP and find a year he missed half the year. The exception, as always, are the Patriots.

[Bretsky]

Indy and Luck
Indy and Manning
Saints and Brees

The answer to your question is pick the QB MVP and find a year he missed half the year. The exception, as always, are the Patriots.


Steelers....I honestly can't remember but wasn't Big Ben out a while and they survived ?

[Bretsky]

Indy and Luck
Indy and Manning
Saints and Brees

The answer to your question is pick the QB MVP and find a year he missed half the year. The exception, as always, are the Patriots.



I don't consider Brees on Rodgers level at all. That team was not that good with Lueck imo and I don't think he's on Rodgers level either

[pbmax]

Brees may no longer be there but he was for awhile and he was on some bad teams and getting MVP consideration.

BR was available for all 16 games in 2013 and they went 8-8. Went 7-8 with him in 2006 when he got 15 starts.

Luck was 7-8 in 15 games while banged up.

[RashanGary]

I see tt as the best GM in football. Keep him as long as he chooses to stay!

[RashanGary]

And after seeing this vote, I definitely see why the haters are so loud! They must feel horribly out numbered and alone in their belief.

[gbgary]

Man, if this roster is as terrible as some are suggesting here how in the hell do we win any games at all? Rodgers is a generational talent but even he can't do it alone.

look back at the 8 games Hundley qb'ed...2-6 with 2 wins against bad teams. wins and losses isn't a qb stat (as Aaron Nagler likes to point out and i agree with)...unless you're talking about Green Bay. with Rodgers on the field the O is nearly unstoppable and makes up for the D's massive shortcomings. he even makes up for offensive short comings.

[denverYooper]

Indy and Luck
Indy and Manning
Saints and Brees

The answer to your question is pick the QB MVP and find a year he missed half the year. The exception, as always, are the Patriots.

And the Patriots get caught cheating just enough so that you don't trust that type of success is truly attainable on honest terms.

[mraynrand]

And the Patriots get caught cheating just enough so that you don't trust that type of success is truly attainable on honest terms.

Holidays with the Patriots...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pdd0jUnPz-M

[woodbuck27]

Gee I'm in the Christmas Spirit and thus very generous today.

Too generous:

I rated him a C.

I'll be overjoyed when he retires.

:wave:

[bobblehead]

His point was the fallacy that drafting low was the excuse for the Packers mediocrity other than Rodgers. My point is Seattle also has drafted pretty low for a long time - along with those others.

Surely you wouldn't suggest that Russell Wilson is even close to Aaron Rodgers quality - would you? And surely you wouldn't suggest the Packers overall talent level other than QB is anywhere near Seattle's - would you?

Have you seen the seahawks offensive line? Its offensive.

[bobblehead]

I assume the one team you mean is the Patriots, but I'd say the Seahawks, Panthers, Broncos, and Steelers haven't been far from the top or drafted very high for quite a while also, and all of them have built better a lot better teams than the Packers minus Aaron Rodgers. And you can add to that probably half a dozen more teams that either only had one down year (the Cowboys) or stayed middle of the pack and seldom drafted very high (the Vikings and Falcons).

Somebody said Bakhtiari is a superstar? Come on!

I reject the idea that Hundley was the reason for the team dropping off without Rodgers. Hundley was fairly decent; It just was the O Line, the receivers, and most of the D that were exposed as so mediocre.

You don't just get to declare that those teams have drafted as low as the packers and there team is better. You actually have to back that argument up. I could destroy the statement should I take the time to, but I won't bother responding to a lazy post with my research.

[ZachMN]

I love how there is an obsession with stats. I trust my eyes. It's not fair to make it all about TT. It's a package deal. He's married to M3 and they have a philosophy and in Capers defense ( no pun intended) he's doing what M3 wants. M3 believes he will more often than not have a lead and the other team will be throwing a lot and taking risks. The defense is predicated on takeaways thus giving our offense more possessions. I admit this worked during the superbowl run but MY EYES see confusion on the defensive side (secondary most often) a team that seriously doesn't look ready to play ( especially in big games) and seems to take an entire half to warm up and get rolling sometimes. I also feel that M3 lacks a killer instinct. We had an offense that could have put 75 up more than once in the last three or four years. I mean wasn't there a game against the 'queens where we had 21 in the first quarter? Hammer these teams. I can tell some of you don't like Belichik but he's got a killer instinct and he's a winner. He goes for it on fourth down when he's up by 21. I like that attitude. I know some of you don't but this is football. It's physical and about attitude. Forget a prissy milquetoast defensive strategy like we currently have and build a BIG defense. Defense travels. Big teams stay big as the year goes on. Fast teams slow down. We play in a cold climate. Have a D line like the Giants did during their two superbowl runs and your other two levels automatically get better. We pass on Watt and take King. Bad decision. Watt makes whoever is paying cb better in my opinion because he can rush the passer. TT is 40% of the problem. It's him and M3...I give Capers a partial pass as he's doing their bidding.

[Bretsky]

And after seeing this vote, I definitely see why the haters are so loud! They must feel horribly out numbered and alone in their belief.

I'm not sure what category you put haters (maybe F area) in,but I see 12 votes for A and B and 11 votes for C and D

[red]

does anyone have a screen cap of TT sitting in the booth looking like corky from "life goes on"?

[mraynrand]

does anyone have a screen cap of TT sitting in the booth looking like corky from "life goes on"?

I'm not giving it to you. If you don't get there first, that will be my new avatar.

[red]

I'm not giving it to you. If you don't get there first, that will be my new avatar.

too late

[call_me_ishmael]

You have no basis for your scale. Either we do the rest of the League and adjust for draft position, or this means little, though I thank you for the all the draft picks in one spot listing.

Your grades are interesting too. Don't see how Jones and Williams grade out to average.

You view them as better than average starters in the league? They aren't even starters in a GB when Ty in healthy. They look decent enough - average RBs as starters to me.

Sorry, I sort of take offense to this because my write-up is spot on. Is a player a good player, a great player, an average player, a bad player, etc. It's black and white. There is no complex algorithm. It's a simple question. Is this person good (if they were a starter if they're not).

The second contract as starter metric is incredibly valuable. If a player goes on and has success, that's fine, but that just means TT didn't think enough of them to sign them as a second contract starter. This is the ultimate measure of a drafter.

The scale is very similar to Ron Wolfe's WRT to judging a draft. TT scores a 2.4 in the past 5 years. Pretty bad.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I love how there is an obsession with stats. I trust my eyes. It's not fair to make it all about TT. It's a package deal. He's married to M3 and they have a philosophy and in Capers defense ( no pun intended) he's doing what M3 wants. M3 believes he will more often than not have a lead and the other team will be throwing a lot and taking risks. The defense is predicated on takeaways thus giving our offense more possessions. I admit this worked during the superbowl run but MY EYES see confusion on the defensive side (secondary most often) a team that seriously doesn't look ready to play ( especially in big games) and seems to take an entire half to warm up and get rolling sometimes. I also feel that M3 lacks a killer instinct. We had an offense that could have put 75 up more than once in the last three or four years. I mean wasn't there a game against the 'queens where we had 21 in the first quarter? Hammer these teams. I can tell some of you don't like Belichik but he's got a killer instinct and he's a winner. He goes for it on fourth down when he's up by 21. I like that attitude. I know some of you don't but this is football. It's physical and about attitude. Forget a prissy milquetoast defensive strategy like we currently have and build a BIG defense. Defense travels. Big teams stay big as the year goes on. Fast teams slow down. We play in a cold climate. Have a D line like the Giants did during their two superbowl runs and your other two levels automatically get better. We pass on Watt and take King. Bad decision. Watt makes whoever is paying cb better in my opinion because he can rush the passer. TT is 40% of the problem. It's him and M3...I give Capers a partial pass as he's doing their bidding.Great post. My old eyes see a lot of the same things.

[mraynrand]

Sorry, I sort of take offense to this because my write-up is spot on. Is a player a good player, a great player, an average player, a bad player, etc. It's black and white. There is no complex algorithm. It's a simple question. Is this person good (if they were a starter if they're not)..

http://packerrats.com/image.php?u=219&dateline=1514091480

[pbmax]

Packers offense and margin of victory (not including this year) are neck and neck with Patriots.

The problem isn't killer instinct, its end of game clock management.

[ZachMN]

Packers offense and margin of victory (not including this year) are neck and neck with Patriots.

The problem isn't killer instinct, its end of game clock management.

Disagree on the killer instinct....so if clock management is to blame that falls under incompetence now doesn't it? EDIT And now that I think about what you posted your statement is absurd. You use meaningless stats to say we are neck and neck with the Pats. Since TT, M3 and Rodgers have been here how many Superbowls have the Packers won/appeared in compared to the Pats? That's what this is about...not arcane numbers which in the end may tell you something but more often than not cause delusion. I'll quote Bud Grant here: 'stats are for losers'. Shoe fits with this regime Cinderella! You can site all the numbers and third down stats etc in the end winning and winning the important games is what matters. We fail there. So when I said all I have is the scoreboard in response to another poster in another thread wasn't capitulating. I was serious. Keep drinking the kool aid folks.

[pbmax]

Disagree on the killer instinct....so if clock management is to blame that falls under incompetence now doesn't it?

I agree, its one dimensional thinking.

But vince has some compelling arguments and data that McCarthy's record, regardless of poor clock management, is fantastic in close, late games.

So we are talking about a few notable failures.

Every coach has foibles. The question is how big are they and how bad do they effect the games? This one is not the worst.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I agree, its one dimensional thinking.

But vince has some compelling arguments and data that McCarthy's record, regardless of poor clock management, is fantastic in close, late games.

So we are talking about a few notable failures.

Every coach has foibles. The question is how big are they and how bad do they effect the games? This one is not the worst.I find the "few notable failures" more compelling than Vince's data. But then that's just me. I've had it with Stubby and his "foibles." Was last night's joke of a game a foible? Stubby's supposed to be an offensive genius and play-caller extraordinaire. I didn't see it last night. I haven't seen it since Arod got hurt. It seems to my uneducated eyes that Stubby's been running the same damn offensive game plan all season long, hoping to get the same results with Hundley as he got with ARod. Genius.

I read that TT and Stubby have one more year left on their contracts. Fine. I'm willing to let them work their magic for another year. Let them hire and fire who they want and then let the chips fall. But I'm sure that next year at this time -- even with a healthy ARod -- we're having the same conversation and listening to the same tired excuses about why we're sharing the basement with the Bears.

And after the season, TT will retire to the Packers' Hall of Fame, his clone will be hired as the team's GM and Stubby's contract will be renewed for another 10 years.

http://packerrats.com/image.php?u=219&dateline=1514091480

[Harlan Huckleby]

I give Teddy a B, although B+ or A- or B+/A- or A-- is closer.
How many franchises have done better?

Teams go to super bowls with very good QBs, doesn't have to be an ace.

I do think a show trial of Teddy would be endless fun. A kangaroo court with a jury of Ted's haters, you know who you are. Force him to watch endless hours of bad plays by his draft picks. If he speaks up, judge Rutnstrut tells him to sit down and shut up. Bailiff red boxes his ears. Ted's attorney will be the dumbest guy in this forum - you don't know who you are.

[Rutnstrut]

I love how there is an obsession with stats. I trust my eyes. It's not fair to make it all about TT. It's a package deal. He's married to M3 and they have a philosophy and in Capers defense ( no pun intended) he's doing what M3 wants. M3 believes he will more often than not have a lead and the other team will be throwing a lot and taking risks. The defense is predicated on takeaways thus giving our offense more possessions. I admit this worked during the superbowl run but MY EYES see confusion on the defensive side (secondary most often) a team that seriously doesn't look ready to play ( especially in big games) and seems to take an entire half to warm up and get rolling sometimes. I also feel that M3 lacks a killer instinct. We had an offense that could have put 75 up more than once in the last three or four years. I mean wasn't there a game against the 'queens where we had 21 in the first quarter? Hammer these teams. I can tell some of you don't like Belichik but he's got a killer instinct and he's a winner. He goes for it on fourth down when he's up by 21. I like that attitude. I know some of you don't but this is football. It's physical and about attitude. Forget a prissy milquetoast defensive strategy like we currently have and build a BIG defense. Defense travels. Big teams stay big as the year goes on. Fast teams slow down. We play in a cold climate. Have a D line like the Giants did during their two superbowl runs and your other two levels automatically get better. We pass on Watt and take King. Bad decision. Watt makes whoever is paying cb better in my opinion because he can rush the passer. TT is 40% of the problem. It's him and M3...I give Capers a partial pass as he's doing their bidding.

Great post.

[wist43]

I gave TT a D. Minus Rodgers, this is a sub-500 roster; but what is the biggest indictment against TT is his steadfast refusal to remove Capers.

I think Capers has more influence on defensive personnel than people think; and the organisations overall disdain for the ILB position is indicative of how clueless this organization is when it comes to all things defense.

We got lucky in '10 - it really was a fart in the wind.

[mraynrand]

I gave TT a D.

which of the other 31 GMs do you rank higher? (this question is for everyone who gives TT a grade of B or lower)

[denverYooper]

which of the other 31 GMs do you rank higher? (this question is for everyone who gives TT a grade of B or lower)

Jerry Reese

[th87]

NFCC 3 of last 4 years. Perennial playoff team. 3rd winningest team in NFL over last 10 years. Has spawned 3 successful top 10 GMs into the league. Started out with the foundation by hiring a head coach that is a top notch QB coach, then drafting and developing a top 5 QB all time despite fans calling for his head when he turned the page on Brent. Consistently drafts in the bottom 5-6 spots of the round but still puts a winner on the field.

I drop him to a B for not insisting on "retiring" Dom. Also, both he and MM have not adjusted to the very limited practice time allowed by NFL rules and gone to a veteran backup to ARod instead of trying to develop a young talent.

How he is above average?? Well, results alone tell you that he is WAY above average since its 100% his roster and team. If you google top 5 GMs in NFL I would bet he is on every layman's list.

He's mainly living off one smart decision in 2004. After 2011, you could have Mel Kiper running the drafts and have just as good a team as we currently do.

And then the "drafting lower than everyone" fallacy. Let's look at the top 5 defenses in the NFL:

Jaguars - only Ramsay was out of our acquisition range. Everyone else on this elite unit was available to us in some way.
Ravens - Suggs, Mosley, Humphrey. These guys shouldn't be the gap between them being elite, and us being mediocre-to-poor.
Rams - Donald, Brockers, Quinn. This is quite the haul, and the Packers were at a huge disadvantage. Conceded.
Vikings - Barr, Rhodes, Waynes. Also shouldn't be the difference between one of the best and one of the worst.
Cardinals - Peterson, Reddick. Same as above.

The conclusion here is that an elite defense is not being precluded by our lower draft position, as only the players above are those that we absolutely couldn't acquire. And with the exception of the Rams, the players listed really shouldn't make that much of a difference, where they're elite, and we're bottom tier.

So it's not lower draft position that's hindering us; it's the fact that we are mediocre-to-poor in defensive player acquisition, as evidenced above.

[pbmax]

On offense:

Rams: 6th (14.3)
Vikes: 7th (11.6)
Jags: 16th (2.4)
Balt: 20th (-5.1)
Arizona: 29th (-19.1)

Packers: 12th (5.1)


Well, it would seem you do it by being bad on offense. So not sure what to learn from Baltimore, Jacksonville and Arizona.

The Rams are this decades 49ers. A decade plus of drafting in the Top 10 because they were a horrible franchise has yielded some good results with a competent coach and front office. Let's see it last more than 3 years before we put them all in the HoF. Does Trent Baalke still work in the NFL?

The Vikes are clearly on the rise overall, having found a functional offense without Peterson and without what most teams would assume is not a lock of an NFL starter. I am impressed. However as pointed out earlier, the average Viking draft pick order is 13.2 and the median is 12.

http://packerrats.com/showthread.php?30181-IS-IT-TIME-TO-PUT-UNTOUCHABLE-TED-ON-TRIAL-HOW-DO-YOU-GRADE-HIM&p=958523&viewfull=1#post958523

I would love to know how the Packers could get their hands on Trae Waynes, Anthony Barr, Shariff Floyd and Xavier Rhodes.

[mraynrand]

I would love to know how the Packers could get their hands on Trae Waynes, Anthony Barr, Shariff Floyd and Xavier Rhodes.

I'd love to get my hands on Barr - preferably around his neck. Merry Christmas.

[Bossman641]

With the exception of the patriots, the competitive teams have waned over the past 7 years. Early on we heard the 49ers and seahawks would challenge the packers for the next decade. Sf fell off hard. Seattle, as i pointed out in another thread, is trending down. Atlanta has gone up and down. The eagles and saints, fresh off strong drafts, are trending up. But the saints are continuously kicking the can down the road when it comes to Brees. The truth of the matter is its hard to stay consistently good. The entire structure is designed to pull everyone back towards the middle. Anyone claiming that the situations between tt and other gms (drafting wise) is the same is frankly ignoring reality.

With all that said, if capers is back next year ill be disappointed.

[call_me_ishmael]

which of the other 31 GMs do you rank higher? (this question is for everyone who gives TT a grade of B or lower)

As far as the past 5 years go, I'd take:

Bill Belichick
Ozzie Newsome
John Dorsey
Kevin Colbert
Reggie McKenzie
Howie Roseman
Rick Spielman
Thomas Dimitroff
John Schneider
Scot McCloughan

Dimitroff is the most questionable on the list, but he gets the nod for more recent super bowl without a HOF QB.

[mraynrand]

Reggie McKenzie. hee hee

[pbmax]

Forget the draft, here is what you need as backup QB.



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DR7-JfTWkAE70GU.jpg:large

[pbmax]

OK, so let me get the math right. If Ted is the 10th best GM in the League in the last five years, he should get the boot?

Uh-huh.

[Carolina_Packer]

It just occurred to me where I've seen that vacant stare that TT had the other night during the game.

https://i.pinimg.com/236x/78/3d/bb/783dbbcee842d2f22e8fa2853aaae184.jpg

[mraynrand]

It just occurred to me where I've seen that vacant stare that TT had the other night during the game.

https://i.pinimg.com/236x/78/3d/bb/783dbbcee842d2f22e8fa2853aaae184.jpg

hahahahahahahaha!

[pbmax]

With Rodgers for only 6 full games, the Packers somehow, despite an idiot as head coach and a moron as GM, are 14th in DVOA average for the season, and that includes weighted score (which considers recent games more important).

Teams with far better personnel departments* below the Packers include:

15 Seattle
16 Atlanta
17 Washington
18 Oakland
22 Arizona
28 San Francisco
29 Denver
30 NY Giants

*just suffering a brief setback due to karma and other factors COMPLETELY outside of their control


I mean, don't we all know Dmitroff, Schneider, McKenzie, McCloughan, John Lynch, John Elway and Jerry Reese are better than Ted?

You have eyes don't you? Any of these guys are better than Ted, who hasn't picked earlier than 21 in the last seven years.

And there is no reason to credit Ted for doing this in the actually competitive NFC. We all know Belichick is better while he competes in the dog breath AFC East.

[mraynrand]

I love how there is an obsession with stats. I trust my eyes.

I look in the standings and see other teams higher than the Packers. I look at the past Superbowl winners and the Packers are only there once under Tad, despite having the greatest QB in modern history who just happened to fall into their lap, fully formed, raising the performance level of everyone around him who couldn't even make the Brown's squad. Have I ever told you how the Packers are always one and done in the playoffs? They should win the Superbowl every year, just like all the other good teams do.

[esoxx]

With Rodgers for only 6 full games, the Packers somehow, despite an idiot as head coach and a moron as GM, are 14th in DVOA average for the season, and that includes weighted score (which considers recent games more important).

Teams with far better personnel departments* below the Packers include:

15 Seattle
16 Atlanta
17 Washington
18 Oakland
22 Arizona
28 San Francisco
29 Denver
30 NY Giants

*just suffering a brief setback due to karma and other factors COMPLETELY outside of their control


I mean, don't we all know Dmitroff, Schneider, McKenzie, McCloughan, John Lynch, John Elway and Jerry Reese are better than Ted?

You have eyes don't you? Any of these guys are better than Ted, who hasn't picked earlier than 21 in the last seven years.

And there is no reason to credit Ted for doing this in the actually competitive NFC. We all know Belichick is better while he competes in the dog breath AFC East.

I think it's fair to say however that none of the names mentioned above have overt signs of early stage dementia. None have the gape mouth, slow slurred speech, and other signs of mental deterioration. I think it's fair to have concerns about the state of his mental coherence at this point. Having Captain Pike post-accident at the head of your ship is not overly inspiring.

[esoxx]

I love how there is an obsession with stats. I trust my eyes.

I look in the standings and see other teams higher than the Packers. I look at the past Superbowl winners and the Packers are only there once under Tad, despite having the greatest QB in modern history who just happened to fall into their lap, fully formed, raising the performance level of everyone around him who couldn't even make the Brown's squad. Have I ever told you how the Packers are always one and done in the playoffs? They should win the Superbowl every year, just like all the other good teams do.

Your narrative is tired.

[Carolina_Packer]

I'm not concerned with comparing him to other GM's in order to make a decision about him. I'm only concerned with the results of the team, and what he is doing or not doing that is affecting those results. The D...not good enough. It's not all TT's fault for his personnel moves, but it is his responsibility over time to fix the issues that have cropped up. I'm not saying I know any of the personnel moves he should have made or did make that adversely affected the performance of the D, but he is ultimately responsible for the results because he allows coaches to be kept around, and was either talked into allowing Capers to stay, or gave MM the ultimate decision on keeping him or firing him, which goes against TT's bottom line.

Injuries suck, and the Packers have had a ton of them. That does affect how the game can be schemed and ultimately played, but in an effort to keep the team young and manage the cap well, their depth has been tested mightily the last two years and has not shown out, but been exposed. Allowing still productive players to walk in favor of guys who are not ultimately ready to be the replacements for the guys who were allowed to leave only puts more pressure on Dom. I'm not saying keep him, I'm just trying to be fair-minded. Clearly what he is trying to do is not working, whether because of injuries, lack of talented depth, or lack of key acquisitions or keeping still productive players in the name of keeping the cap clean and roster churning. Everyone here to a person at least had some concern/questions about where the pass rush was going to come from this year, and that has proven to be a founded concern. These are all red ledger items for TT, and it's time for him to fix it or risk continuing to waste the presence of a once in a generation QB.

[texaspackerbacker]

Strangely, to me anyway, only 6 out of 33 in the poll have Ted in the bottom two categories. I've observed that whenever there are articles with comments or opportunities for posting in Yahoo, Facebook, Twitter, or wherever, there is a MUCH bigger anti-Ted percentage (and I'm talking about strangers, not merely friends and relatives of mine).

Draw your own conclusions about that, I guess.

I've also observed in those places, it's about 50/50 on Capers and strongly negative on poor Hundley, who I still say is a damn good QB, just surrounded by mediocrity that Aaron Rodgers managed to make look good.

[bobblehead]

I don't think you can put many of those QB's in the same class as Rodgers. Rodger and Brady....GB and NE.....have elite QB's

the rest are good

Or do they both benefit from having more weapons? Also, by the numbers they are not the 2 best QBs in the game. I think someone somewhere posted about how Brady benefits big time from the D he gets to play with.

Rodgers best play in the NFCC the year we won the bowl was tackling a defender after he threw a pick.

I agree, Rodgers legs elevate him above every elite passer in the game, and his passing elevates him above mobile QBs. However, without him we still competed. Look at how Houston has been without Watson...a rookie!!

I can pin blame where it is deserved, no problem. But seriously, TT has spawned more successful GMs than anyone I can think of. MM on the other hand has spawned no one. Capers needs to go first. If MM doesn't can him then TT should can MM. If neither happens then both should be canned.

[bobblehead]

I don't consider Brees on Rodgers level at all. That team was not that good with Lueck imo and I don't think he's on Rodgers level either

If the only argument that counts is yours, then yes, you are correct.

[bobblehead]

look back at the 8 games Hundley qb'ed...2-6 with 2 wins against bad teams. wins and losses isn't a qb stat (as Aaron Nagler likes to point out and i agree with)...unless you're talking about Green Bay. with Rodgers on the field the O is nearly unstoppable and makes up for the D's massive shortcomings. he even makes up for offensive short comings.

Math is not your strong suit is it?

And show me all the shootouts that we lost in the playoffs where Rodgers carried them.

Edit...just 2 seasons ago the D held 2 opponents to 20 in regulation....Rodgers was 1-1

[texaspackerbacker]

Bobble, did I seriously read in post #113 that you said Aaron Rodgers "benefits from having more weapons" like Brady?

If Aaron Rodgers ever had time like Brady gets to throw, he'd be even better than he is, and if he EVER had receivers like Atlanta or Minnesota or NE or probably more than half of the other teams in the league, we'd score 40 or 50 every game.

[bobblehead]

Disagree on the killer instinct....so if clock management is to blame that falls under incompetence now doesn't it? EDIT And now that I think about what you posted your statement is absurd. You use meaningless stats to say we are neck and neck with the Pats. Since TT, M3 and Rodgers have been here how many Superbowls have the Packers won/appeared in compared to the Pats? That's what this is about...not arcane numbers which in the end may tell you something but more often than not cause delusion. I'll quote Bud Grant here: 'stats are for losers'. Shoe fits with this regime Cinderella! You can site all the numbers and third down stats etc in the end winning and winning the important games is what matters. We fail there. So when I said all I have is the scoreboard in response to another poster in another thread wasn't capitulating. I was serious. Keep drinking the kool aid folks.

By your own logic, TT is wildly successful.

[bobblehead]

I find the "few notable failures" more compelling than Vince's data. But then that's just me. I've had it with Stubby and his "foibles." Was last night's joke of a game a foible? Stubby's supposed to be an offensive genius and play-caller extraordinaire. I didn't see it last night. I haven't seen it since Arod got hurt. It seems to my uneducated eyes that Stubby's been running the same damn offensive game plan all season long, hoping to get the same results with Hundley as he got with ARod. Genius.

I read that TT and Stubby have one more year left on their contracts. Fine. I'm willing to let them work their magic for another year. Let them hire and fire who they want and then let the chips fall. But I'm sure that next year at this time -- even with a healthy ARod -- we're having the same conversation and listening to the same tired excuses about why we're sharing the basement with the Bears.

And after the season, TT will retire to the Packers' Hall of Fame, his clone will be hired as the team's GM and Stubby's contract will be renewed for another 10 years.

http://packerrats.com/image.php?u=219&dateline=1514091480

For real? I wish they ran the ball that much with Arod. Give him easy 3rd and 2nd downs. Rest the D. Keep opposing D off balance. The 2 O's aren't even similar, you must be watching football on a bizzarro world TV

[bobblehead]

Jerry Reese

Wow...you mean the guy who hired MM's acolyte and burned the organization to the ground? This is the epitome of a GM who got lucky with a hot QB at just the right moment. 2 seasons ago (or was it last?) he spent a trumpian fortune on the Defense and is now the fired GM of a 2-13 team.

Bravo, you just broke the internet with stupidity!

[bobblehead]

As far as the past 5 years go, I'd take:

Bill Belichick
Ozzie Newsome
John Dorsey
Kevin Colbert
Reggie McKenzie
Howie Roseman
Rick Spielman
Thomas Dimitroff
John Schneider
Scot McCloughan

Dimitroff is the most questionable on the list, but he gets the nod for more recent super bowl without a HOF QB.

So....3 TT acolytes?

[bobblehead]

With Rodgers for only 6 full games, the Packers somehow, despite an idiot as head coach and a moron as GM, are 14th in DVOA average for the season, and that includes weighted score (which considers recent games more important).

Teams with far better personnel departments* below the Packers include:

15 Seattle
16 Atlanta
17 Washington
18 Oakland
22 Arizona
28 San Francisco
29 Denver
30 NY Giants

*just suffering a brief setback due to karma and other factors COMPLETELY outside of their control


I mean, don't we all know Dmitroff, Schneider, McKenzie, McCloughan, John Lynch, John Elway and Jerry Reese are better than Ted?

You have eyes don't you? Any of these guys are better than Ted, who hasn't picked earlier than 21 in the last seven years.

And there is no reason to credit Ted for doing this in the actually competitive NFC. We all know Belichick is better while he competes in the dog breath AFC East.

I finally figured it out.

No argument is relevant in TTs defense cuz....Rodgers....the QB he drafted when he was heavily criticized for wasting the end of Favre's career. See, TT was so dumb he drafted Rodgers who is so good that any argument to defend TT is irrelevant.

[bobblehead]

I think it's fair to say however that none of the names mentioned above have overt signs of early stage dementia. None have the gape mouth, slow slurred speech, and other signs of mental deterioration. I think it's fair to have concerns about the state of his mental coherence at this point. Having Captain Pike post-accident at the head of your ship is not overly inspiring.

Fielding a shitty team is a sure sign of mental deterioration, and honestly the only thing I care about.

[bobblehead]

Bobble, did I seriously read in post #113 that you said Aaron Rodgers "benefits from having more weapons" like Brady?

If Aaron Rodgers ever had time like Brady gets to throw, he'd be even better than he is, and if he EVER had receivers like Atlanta or Minnesota or NE or probably more than half of the other teams in the league, we'd score 40 or 50 every game.

I thought WR is the only position TT can scout? Which is it? And brady dumps to RBs quite often. Rodgers rarely does.

[pbmax]

Wow...you mean the guy who hired MM's acolyte and burned the organization to the ground? This is the epitome of a GM who got lucky with a hot QB at just the right moment. 2 seasons ago (or was it last?) he spent a trumpian fortune on the Defense and is now the fired GM of a 2-13 team.

Bravo, you just broke the internet with stupidity!

Yoop was kidding. He was teasing Bretsky via Rand and wist. Bretsky was a long time fan of Reese.

[pbmax]

tex, Brady has had some terrible pass protection problems in recent years. Since Logan Mankins began to get old, in fact. That offense gets the ball out faster than almost any other. They have been better the last two years.

In comparison, Rodgers waits WAY longer than Brady to get rid of the ball typically. So his better pass pro does eventually break down but normally after 3 seconds of waiting.

With 4 tackles having missed games, Packers are 30th this year in sack rate. Hundley is NOT helping in this area. Patriots are 12th.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol

[texaspackerbacker]

My point was the Patriots and just about everybody else have better receivers than the Packers have. Ours were exposed as overrated without Rodgers throwing to them.

[pbmax]

My point was the Patriots and just about everybody else have better receivers than the Packers have. Ours were exposed as overrated without Rodgers throwing to them.

Gronk is the only position I consider in the Patriots favor until Jordy fell into a hole the second half of this year.

It took the Patriots a while to figure out what to do with Cooks, he has had a grand total of two big games for them.

[denverYooper]

Wow...you mean the guy who hired MM's acolyte and burned the organization to the ground? This is the epitome of a GM who got lucky with a hot QB at just the right moment. 2 seasons ago (or was it last?) he spent a trumpian fortune on the Defense and is now the fired GM of a 2-13 team.

Bravo, you just broke the internet with stupidity!

I forgot to use sarcasm font.

[Bretsky]

Or do they both benefit from having more weapons? Also, by the numbers they are not the 2 best QBs in the game. I think someone somewhere posted about how Brady benefits big time from the D he gets to play with.

Rodgers best play in the NFCC the year we won the bowl was tackling a defender after he threw a pick.

I agree, Rodgers legs elevate him above every elite passer in the game, and his passing elevates him above mobile QBs. However, without him we still competed. Look at how Houston has been without Watson...a rookie!!

I can pin blame where it is deserved, no problem. But seriously, TT has spawned more successful GMs than anyone I can think of. MM on the other hand has spawned no one. Capers needs to go first. If MM doesn't can him then TT should can MM. If neither happens then both should be canned.

Agree Dom is the no brainer; even if he isn't terrible it's time for a change. Sometimes changing to something new is just good.

[Bretsky]

If the only argument that counts is yours, then yes, you are correct.

are you saying Brees is on Rodgers level ? That Brees carried our team just as well as Rodgers ?

[texaspackerbacker]

Mark my words, if Capers is gone, and there is anything short of an impossibly huge improvement in personnel, our Defense will really bottom out. We just don't have the talent to play teams straight up without schemes and trickery like Capers specializes in. All this whining about getting rid of him is just plain ignorant.

[Bretsky]

THIS IS A KICK ASS THREAD; plenty of debate/arguing/tassling..pot stirring. This is real live debate and entertaining !!

[Bretsky]

Mark my words, if Capers is gone, and there is anything short of an impossibly huge improvement in personnel, our Defense will really bottom out. We just don't have the talent to play teams straight up without schemes and trickery like Capers specializes in. All this whining about getting rid of him is just plain ignorant.

I don't think Capers is Satan like many in here but I have to admit this. Too Many times we have players runhing around confused as the ball is ready to snap. Too many mental breakdowns leading to big plays They just don't seem well prepared anymore.

I think it's time for a change

[texaspackerbacker]

Then get some kind of a whip cracking disciplinarian as an assistant D coordinator or something, or maybe get some better position coaches, but do NOT change the type of D we play or the guy who is the brains of that system - not unless we miraculously get about three times as good personnel as we have now on D.

[mraynrand]

I don't think Capers is Satan

we're making progress here.

[mraynrand]

My point was the Patriots and just about everybody else have better receivers than the Packers have.

what's your metric for comparison?

[mraynrand]

Your narrative is tired.

It's more like raw sarcasm. And it's not tired, more like aching red eyes, scratchy throat, and mild hallucinations from being up for 36 hours.

[call_me_ishmael]

Reggie McKenzie. hee hee

The Raiders team he constructed has a lot of talent despite having horrible ownership. I think they've done well for themselves by being so bad for so long.

[call_me_ishmael]

OK, so let me get the math right. If Ted is the 10th best GM in the League in the last five years, he should get the boot?

Uh-huh.

That's current GMs. Surely there have been others cycled in and out. It's really hard to say... I don't follow other teams as closely so it's all speculation and here-say. If you look at my original breakdown, it paints a very clear picture using the Ron Wolf draft scale of 3 good starters being the metric for a successful draft. I derived my own GPA equation from it. It's a pretty logical extension to the 3 good starters system.

The fact is the drafting results have been trash (2.4 GPA where even a completely inept idiot should get a 2.0 for merely showing up) since 2012. The 2012 and 2013 drafts are historically bad and are the main reason the Packers are devoid of talent right now. 2014 looks great. 2015 and 2016 remain to being seen but show both boom/bust potential still. We shall see. The numbers I posted paint a pretty awful picture, especially defensively speaking. Extend this argument to 6 years and the GPA drops dramatically further as 2011 was another historically bad draft.

We are wasting ARods prime. This team won't have the defensive talent to win the super bowl in 2018 either, so we're looking at 2019 at the earliest w/ two more great drafts.

[call_me_ishmael]

So....3 TT acolytes?

Sure, if you wish to call them that. I am being very fair to Ted. Look at the draft picks. 2011, 2012 and 2013 drafts are historically awful and show why this team is where they are. Contrast that with some of his earlier drafts like 2009, 2010 which were truly outstanding. My opinion is it's no coincidence that Ted has a hip replacement and other alleged health complicated in the 2011-2013 period (I think, anyway).

Here's 2011 to show how awful it was to go with the other recent drafts I showed. 2011-2014 players right now are the meat and potatoes of a 2017 roster, and the Packers picks were awful for three straight years before returning to a (probable) much better place.

2011 - One second contract as starter, one good. Draft grade is D or F due to 1 starter that earned a second contract as a good player
Sherrod - bad
Cobb - good
Green - bad
House - bad, gone, did not earn second contract in GB
Williams - bad
Schlauderaff - bad
Smith - bad
Elmore - bad
Taylor - bad
Guy - bad
McMillion - bad
Manning - bad
Datko - bad
Coleman - bad



For fun, here's 2010 which is very good.
2010: Very good draft, one of Ted's best. Neal was a decent player before he was blackballed. 3 starters earned second contracts, 2 are good players, 1 is average. Draft grade is A.
Bulaga - good
Neal - average
Burnett - good
Quarless - bad
Newhouse - bad
Starks - average
Wilson - bad

2009: Very good draft, possibly Ted's best. 3 good starters, A+.
Raji - good
Matthews - good
Lang - good
Johnson - bad
Wynn - bad
Underwood - bad
Jones - bad

2008: Very good draft, possibly Ted's best. 3 good starters, A+.
Nelson - good
Brohm - bad
Lee - bad
Finley - good
Thompson - Undetermined, injury retirement
Sitton - good
Giacomini - bad
Flynn - bad
Swain - bad

[call_me_ishmael]

Seriously, looking at the 2008, 2009, 2010 drafts paired with ARod, it is not surprising they won the super bowl in 2010. 2008, 2009, and 2010 was an unbelievable 3 year stretch in drafting. 3 good/average starters per year where the good players were very good at the time.

[mraynrand]

The Raiders team he constructed has a lot of talent despite having horrible ownership. I think they've done well for themselves by being so bad for so long.

It's not that hard to pick the physical freaks in the top ten, unless you're Cleveland. The 49ers did it for several years, and once they got a decent coach, they took off. There's nothing all that much there to commend Reggie McKenzie, especially if you judge GMs on bottom line.

[mraynrand]

I don't follow other teams as closely so it's all speculation and here-say. .

thank you for making my point

[texaspackerbacker]

Sure, if you wish to call them that. I am being very fair to Ted. Look at the draft picks. 2011, 2012 and 2013 drafts are historically awful and show why this team is where they are. Contrast that with some of his earlier drafts like 2009, 2010 which were truly outstanding. My opinion is it's no coincidence that Ted has a hip replacement and other alleged health complicated in the 2011-2013 period (I think, anyway).

Here's 2011 to show how awful it was to go with the other recent drafts I showed. 2011-2014 players right now are the meat and potatoes of a 2017 roster, and the Packers picks were awful for three straight years before returning to a (probable) much better place.

2011 - One second contract as starter, one good. Draft grade is D or F due to 1 starter that earned a second contract as a good player
Sherrod - bad
Cobb - good
Green - bad
House - bad, gone, did not earn second contract in GB
Williams - bad
Schlauderaff - bad
Smith - bad
Elmore - bad
Taylor - bad
Guy - bad
McMillion - bad
Manning - bad
Datko - bad
Coleman - bad



For fun, here's 2010 which is very good.
2010: Very good draft, one of Ted's best. Neal was a decent player before he was blackballed. 3 starters earned second contracts, 2 are good players, 1 is average. Draft grade is A.
Bulaga - good
Neal - average
Burnett - good
Quarless - bad
Newhouse - bad
Starks - average
Wilson - bad

2009: Very good draft, possibly Ted's best. 3 good starters, A+.
Raji - good
Matthews - good
Lang - good
Johnson - bad
Wynn - bad
Underwood - bad
Jones - bad

2008: Very good draft, possibly Ted's best. 3 good starters, A+.
Nelson - good
Brohm - bad
Lee - bad
Finley - good
Thompson - Undetermined, injury retirement
Sitton - good
Giacomini - bad
Flynn - bad
Swain - bad

To get A+, A, or A-, you need to get 3, 2, or 1 real star quality players. The only one I see on that list who qualifies is Clay Matthews. Several fairly mediocre starters barely makes it to a B if there are enough of them in a given draft.

[pbmax]

I want to point out the "Bad" draft pick Marshall Newhouse is still starting in the NFL.

So either Ted is pretty good OR the rest of the League much more worse.

[denverYooper]

I want to point out the "Bad" draft pick Marshall Newhouse is still starting in the NFL.

So either Ted is pretty good OR the rest of the League much more worse.

Lawrence Guy has been starting for the Patriots.

House is also at least "Average", having gone to make some money on a second contract and then coming back to GB.

[call_me_ishmael]

I want to point out the "Bad" draft pick Marshall Newhouse is still starting in the NFL.

So either Ted is pretty good OR the rest of the League much more worse.

He was a bad pick for the Packers. He was terrible when he was here. Sorry, letting a player go that becomes great is a NEGATIVE for a org, not a positive.

[call_me_ishmael]

thank you for making my point

Which is why my system is simple and uses *what we know about the players when they were on the Packers* and uses the second-contract-as-starter metric. Sorry, the system isn't flawed. Where are the logical errors, if they exist? What part of the evaluation is incorrect? Occasionally a team let's a promising young player go and doesn't offer a second contract, but it's not often, and frankly I can't think of very many if any instances where this happened to the Packers. If a team thinks highly of a player and think they have a very bright future, they find a way to keep them, period. The Packers had no idea what Hayward or Hyde would become, for example.

Stating "Which GMs would you rather have?" is a tough question to answer, but to say "What sort of job has Ted done at building a roster for 2017 over the past 5-6 years" and it's clear from 2011, 2012 and 2013 that the team would have minimal depth in 2017. He did an average job from 2011, 2012, 2015 at best.

Average drafting paired with limited use of free agency and external player acquisition is not good enough in my opinion. Given ARod has a few years left, I would personally rather go all in at least one of these years and have a chance to win the darn thing.

If the Packers keep drafting well like they have in recent years (2014, 2015, 2016), they'll have the talent and depth to be very competitive in 2019 I think.

[call_me_ishmael]

To get A+, A, or A-, you need to get 3, 2, or 1 real star quality players. The only one I see on that list who qualifies is Clay Matthews. Several fairly mediocre starters barely makes it to a B if there are enough of them in a given draft.

No, the system is basically as follows:

3 starters, 2 being red chip or greater = A
3 starters, 1 being red chip or greater = B
2 starters, 2 being red chip or greater = B
2 starters, 0 or 1 being red chip or greater = C
1 starter, 1 being red chip or greater = D
Otherwise = F

It's a simple scale derived from the Ron Wolfe system where a good draft produces three solid starters. When I say "good" or "red chip", I really just mean "not a huge liability". I don't mean all-pro or pro-bowl. Morgan Burnett is a good player but he'll never be a star for example.

Look at the players drafted in 2011, 2012, 2013 and tell me those aren't some of the worst drafts in NFL history. It's no surprise we are where we are with three straight drafts like that. There's no depth when you land a total of 4 starters over 3 years.

[call_me_ishmael]

Lawrence Guy has been starting for the Patriots.

House is also at least "Average", having gone to make some money on a second contract and then coming back to GB.

I can't speak to Lawrence Guy, maybe he became a good player but in his time with the Packers he did jack squat. Davon House went on to earn a decent contract and flamed out. He's a journeyman. Nothing special there. Maybe `bad` is a little harsh for house but in general average or not, he never became a starter nor did he earn a second-contract-as-starter with the Packers. They decided to let him walk because he wasn't worth the money he was offered. The fact he was cut two years later basically proves that out.

[red]

I want to point out the "Bad" draft pick Marshall Newhouse is still starting in the NFL.

So either Ted is pretty good OR the rest of the League much more worse.

This is what gets me. I can look at Hyde and Hayward and say, ok, they got better after they left because capers sucks

But guys like Newhouse, Barclays, eds, and I want to say there’s another one. They were all terrible in Green Bay, but not only are they still playing, they’re starters. I’m pretty sure it’s not Caleb, cause he’s done wonders with a lot of other guys. So what gives with the o line?

Is it all just scheme? Or experience?

[Joemailman]

This is what gets me. I can look at Hyde and Hayward and say, ok, they got better after they left because capers sucks

But guys like Newhouse, Barclays, eds, and I want to say there’s another one. They were all terrible in Green Bay, but not only are they still playing, they’re starters. I’m pretty sure it’s not Caleb, cause he’s done wonders with a lot of other guys. So what gives with the o line?

Is it all just scheme? Or experience?

I think a lot of it is scheme. MM has always been reluctant to give OT's help. Max protection is something he really only did his first year here. If Barclay is playing OT on these other teams, I'll bet he's getting help against good pass rushers.

[pbmax]

This is what gets me. I can look at Hyde and Hayward and say, ok, they got better after they left because capers sucks

But guys like Newhouse, Barclays, eds, and I want to say there’s another one. They were all terrible in Green Bay, but not only are they still playing, they’re starters. I’m pretty sure it’s not Caleb, cause he’s done wonders with a lot of other guys. So what gives with the o line?

Is it all just scheme? Or experience?

Experience definitely helps.

But Newhouse and Hyde are still limited. Newhouse has spent as much time as a backup than as a starter. So he is better than a street FA but might not be better than your starter. Hyde is apparently playing his natural position of safety (whether or not he is deep or a SS is unknown to me) where speed is not as much of an issue. Its the role in his case. But remember, the Bills D has been getting worse rather than better with him there. And that is because the Bills are shedding other D talent. You lose pass rush, your pass D looks worse.

Newhouse was on a bad Giants O line and is now on an underperforming Oakland O line.

The problem with ishmael's list is that Ted doesn't pay average players to stay, but they do stay in the League. He just replaces them with cheaper, younger options.

[Carolina_Packer]

He was a bad pick for the Packers. He was terrible when he was here. Sorry, letting a player go that becomes great is a NEGATIVE for a org, not a positive.

Ish, he wasn't a bad pick, as much as he was needed before he was really developed as a player. That seems to happen with the Packers. Their guys get injured, and the guy behind him generally is green as grass and has a baptism by fire. It's not his fault the way TT constructs a roster. TT does have the option of making some of his immediate depth have more experience, but generally chooses not to.

I consider bad picks to be players who were over-drafted in a round higher than their eventual performance demonstrated. The safety McMillon from U of Maine. He was a classic bad pick. When Green Bay decided to cut ties before his first contract was up (in-season), and he did not make an impact elsewhere, that's bad. He was a 4th rounder if I recall correctly. For a draft and develop team, you can't afford too many of those. If McMillon was a late rounder, well, that's life.

[mraynrand]

Experience definitely helps.

But Newhouse and Hyde are still limited. Newhouse has spent as much time as a backup than as a starter. So he is better than a street FA but might not be better than your starter. Hyde is apparently playing his natural position of safety (whether or not he is deep or a SS is unknown to me) where speed is not as much of an issue. Its the role in his case. But remember, the Bills D has been getting worse rather than better with him there. And that is because the Bills are shedding other D talent. You lose pass rush, your pass D looks worse.

Newhouse was on a bad Giants O line and is now on an underperforming Oakland O line.

The problem with ishmael's list is that Ted doesn't pay average players to stay, but they do stay in the League. He just replaces them with cheaper, younger options.

Marshmallow Outhouse is barely stop gap. Right now he might on average get in the way of the defender better than say Spriggs but he’s reached his ceiling and it is ‘marginally serviceable backup’. Oakland suffers with him out there.

[call_me_ishmael]

Ish, he wasn't a bad pick, as much as he was needed before he was really developed as a player. That seems to happen with the Packers. Their guys get injured, and the guy behind him generally is green as grass and has a baptism by fire. It's not his fault the way TT constructs a roster. TT does have the option of making some of his immediate depth have more experience, but generally chooses not to.

I consider bad picks to be players who were over-drafted in a round higher than their eventual performance demonstrated. The safety McMillon from U of Maine. He was a classic bad pick. When Green Bay decided to cut ties before his first contract was up (in-season), and he did not make an impact elsewhere, that's bad. He was a 4th rounder if I recall correctly. For a draft and develop team, you can't afford too many of those. If McMillon was a late rounder, well, that's life.

Yeah, that's a fair take that I don't disagree with. I want to be clear: I am not in the "Ted needs to go NOW" club. I think his entire body of work is pretty good frankly. His early drafts were outstanding, and his most recent drafts appear to be very good too.

2011, 2012 and 2013 have really hurt this team and ultimately will impact Rodgers legacy. The players drafted those years should be core contributors and at their prime right now. Instead, we have one stud in Bahk, and a few decent players. Didn't Ted have some health problems in 2012 and 2013? I believe he had a confirmed hip replacement and I think there were many rumors of additional health problems. Those health problems, paired with McKenzie, Schneider and Dorsey leaving in a very amount of time, likely led to the bad drafts that leave the team without much depth or star power right now.

[mraynrand]

There was nothing All that wrong with the 2013 draft. They got a lot of starts out of 5 guys. There’s attrition there just because they can’t afford to keep everyone. And it hurts to have eddie get fat and lazy so soon, but they got a few good years out of him.

Bacteria is a total gem. When you can draft arguably the third most valuable player on your roster at a position like that it’s a huge score. You want all your picks to work out but it just doesn’t happen.

Because Jones was so meh and Lacy had a short career that draft gets a lower score but it was not bad.

[call_me_ishmael]

There was nothing All that wrong with the 2013 draft. They got a lot of starts out of 5 guys. There’s attrition there just because they can’t afford to keep everyone. And it hurts to have eddie get fat and lazy so soon, but they got a few good years out of him.

Bacteria is a total gem. When you can draft arguably the third most valuable player on your roster at a position like that it’s a huge score. You want all your picks to work out but it just doesn’t happen.

Because Jones was so meh and Lacy had a short career that draft gets a lower score but it was not bad.

I think Bakhtiari is the second most valuable Packer so no disagreement there.

I don't really get how you can say it's not bad. There was one player from it given a second contract by the team. He is a very good player.

Lacy was good and readily available for two years, but after that his carriers per game dwindled quickly and he was in the doghouse. 2015 was the year he was disciplined for being overweight, so year 3, and year 4 was basically injured the entire time. He has done nothing in Seattle. Is two years of production worth calling someone a good player? That's up for debate but he did not give the Packers a long term starting option or a second contract so I tend to say no I guess but it's not a definitive no.

Tretter was always injured and didn't earn/receive a second contract from GB. Of course he played 15 games this year so who knows if they made the right call or not.

Franklin's career was ended too early.

Hyde was a servicable player in GB but he didn't earn a second contract and people here ripped on him incessantly. I think he was better than most thought he was I perceive.

The rest are basically nobodies.

tl;dr
So if you look at the 2013-2015, 2013 draft was good in that it yielded Lacy, Bahk, Hyde as starters, where two were pretty good players. That would be an A grade. Unfortunately things unraveled as time went on and the draft looks worse and worse. This is a very unique draft in that sense I believe.

[mraynrand]

^ you don't always get a whole collection of starters from a draft for a variety of reasons. Sometimes guys like Tretter and Hyde play a lot of years for you, and sometimes they become expendable. It doesn't make them bad picks. Lacy was effective for big chunks of several years (get it, big chunks).

I've been saying this for years: go now and do a comparison with NE's drafts over the same period and see what you see. Or Oakland. Or Kansas City. Or your favorite GM. See how they did with every pick. You may be surprised at what you find.

[call_me_ishmael]

^ you don't always get a whole collection of starters from a draft for a variety of reasons. Sometimes guys like Tretter and Hyde play a lot of years for you, and sometimes they become expendable. It doesn't make them bad picks. Lacy was effective for big chunks of several years (get it, big chunks).

I've been saying this for years: go now and do a comparison with NE's drafts over the same period and see what you see. Or Oakland. Or Kansas City. Or your favorite GM. See how they did with every pick. You may be surprised at what you find.

But those teams are not afraid of free agency the way TT historically has been. NE has consistently added talent such that they are always among the most talented teams top-to-bottom. Same with KC. The Packers are lacking talent big time right now. They don't have a single difference maker beyond AR. NE has a great young receiver in Cooks, and a few studs in the secondary. Kansas City has a few defensive studs. Oakland has Kahlil Mack. Who do we have other than Rodgers? That's the point.

[mraynrand]

But those teams are not afraid of free agency the way TT historically has been. NE has consistently added talent such that they are always among the most talented teams top-to-bottom. Same with KC. The Packers are lacking talent big time right now. They don't have a single difference maker beyond AR. NE has a great young receiver in Cooks, and a few studs in the secondary. Kansas City has a few defensive studs. Oakland has Kahlil Mack. Who do we have other than Rodgers? That's the point.

You only came up with Cooks. OK, that was a good move by NE. Mack was a top draft pick - one of those freaks you get in the top 10. Packers don't have access to that except at a very steep cost. Where did K.C.'s defensive studs come from? Trade, FA or draft?

Next season, Packers could have a secondary with King, Randall, and Jones all playing at a high level. They need at least one difference maker in pass rush from end or LB. Unlikely it's Beigel or Fackrell, but who knows?

On offense they have the three running backs and Monty back. They need to find another playmaker.

Ted isn't afraid of FA - he just wants value. Maybe this year he adds a Woodson or Peppers.

So pass rush and receiver from the draft or FA and they could be right back at 12 plus wins. APRH

[bobblehead]

Sure, if you wish to call them that. I am being very fair to Ted. Look at the draft picks. 2011, 2012 and 2013 drafts are historically awful and show why this team is where they are. Contrast that with some of his earlier drafts like 2009, 2010 which were truly outstanding. My opinion is it's no coincidence that Ted has a hip replacement and other alleged health complicated in the 2011-2013 period (I think, anyway).

Here's 2011 to show how awful it was to go with the other recent drafts I showed. 2011-2014 players right now are the meat and potatoes of a 2017 roster, and the Packers picks were awful for three straight years before returning to a (probable) much better place.

2011 - One second contract as starter, one good. Draft grade is D or F due to 1 starter that earned a second contract as a good player
Sherrod - bad
Cobb - good
Green - bad
House - bad, gone, did not earn second contract in GB
Williams - bad
Schlauderaff - bad
Smith - bad
Elmore - bad
Taylor - bad
Guy - bad
McMillion - bad
Manning - bad
Datko - bad
Coleman - bad



For fun, here's 2010 which is very good.
2010: Very good draft, one of Ted's best. Neal was a decent player before he was blackballed. 3 starters earned second contracts, 2 are good players, 1 is average. Draft grade is A.
Bulaga - good
Neal - average
Burnett - good
Quarless - bad
Newhouse - bad
Starks - average
Wilson - bad

2009: Very good draft, possibly Ted's best. 3 good starters, A+.
Raji - good
Matthews - good
Lang - good
Johnson - bad
Wynn - bad
Underwood - bad
Jones - bad

2008: Very good draft, possibly Ted's best. 3 good starters, A+.
Nelson - good
Brohm - bad
Lee - bad
Finley - good
Thompson - Undetermined, injury retirement
Sitton - good
Giacomini - bad
Flynn - bad
Swain - bad

I don't have much time, but just to make a point. You label both Newhouse and Giacomini bad. They were what, 5th rounders? The 2 GM's you rate highly, Schneider and Mckenzie picked them up and started them for years....couldn't replace them with better players which ted did.

[Bretsky]

Partial....Kudos to you for going in so much detail and taking the time to do so in making a case

[mraynrand]

Partial....Kudos to you for going in so much detail and taking the time to do so in making a case

good
bad
bad
good
bad

[Bretsky]

well he puts in the effort with a lot of detail which takes more time than just ripping into things

I'd love to have somebody really dive into rounds one and two the last few years and break down a redraft sceanario given how players have developed

But stuff like that, and what partial did, takes time

[mraynrand]

well he puts in the effort with a lot of detail which takes more time than just ripping into things

I'd love to have somebody really dive into rounds one and two the last few years and break down a redraft sceanario given how players have developed

But stuff like that, and what partial did, takes time

I wasn't impressed overall, but I get your point. If I have some time to waste I might do what I challenged Partial to try : team by team comparisons.

[call_me_ishmael]

You weren't impressed overall because you disagree with the conclusions but that doesn't make them wrong or unfounded. The criteria is black and white. Just because Giacommini and Newhouse eventually found rosters, that doesn't mean they were anything more than a bad starter w/ potential. What player specifically is the evaluation wrong on? I am sure some could be up for debate and I will concede there is a lot of nuance to player evaluations and often times it's difficult to categorize them.

The reality is the drafts in 2011, 2012 and 2013 were terrible for 2016 and 2017 squads.

The only present starters that were offered second contracts by the team are:
Nick Perry - average to above-average starter, nothing special, often injured
Mike Daniels - undersized but above-average starter
David Bakhtiari - special player
Randall Cobb - average to above-average starter, nothing special

That is awfully rough and frankly indisputable. I don't see how someone can disagree with that assessment but to each their own. When applying the Ron Wolfe successful draft philosophy, the Packers should have 9 starters from those 3 drafts. They have 4. That's bad.

[mraynrand]

You weren't impressed overall because you disagree with the conclusions but that doesn't make them wrong or unfounded.

I do not disagree with your specific point: "The reality is the drafts in 2011, 2012 and 2013 were terrible for 2016 and 2017 squads." if that analysis is limited to the number and quantity of the picks from those drafts contributing to the last two teams it's essentially correct but it's limited.

Still about your conclusions:

1) I thought they were pretty shallow. 2) I don't agree with the criteria, but it's not terribly far off 3) There's too little internal perspective (for example my point that guys may not be on today's roster, not because they were bad picks, but for other reasons. e.g. injuries and other players emerging) and 4) perspective compared to others teams (this is hard work, but it makes a big difference). 5) I only specifically pointed out that 2013 was not all that bad. I don't believe I evaluated 2011 and 2012. 6) You are lumping in responses others made with your response to my post. I realize this happens on a forum, but some of those arguments are not mine.

[Smidgeon]

You weren't impressed overall because you disagree with the conclusions but that doesn't make them wrong or unfounded. The criteria is black and white. Just because Giacommini and Newhouse eventually found rosters, that doesn't mean they were anything more than a bad starter w/ potential. What player specifically is the evaluation wrong on? I am sure some could be up for debate and I will concede there is a lot of nuance to player evaluations and often times it's difficult to categorize them.

The reality is the drafts in 2011, 2012 and 2013 were terrible for 2016 and 2017 squads.

The only present starters that were offered second contracts by the team are:
Nick Perry - average to above-average starter, nothing special, often injured
Mike Daniels - undersized but above-average starter
David Bakhtiari - special player
Randall Cobb - average to above-average starter, nothing special

That is awfully rough and frankly indisputable. I don't see how someone can disagree with that assessment but to each their own. When applying the Ron Wolfe successful draft philosophy, the Packers should have 9 starters from those 3 drafts. They have 4. That's bad.

I like the effort you made to categorize them, and while the criteria is black and white, slotting players into that criteria is still subjective. You ranked many players less than what I would have ranked them, but ultimately like rand is saying, those rankings depend on the rest of the league too.

Now if average meant they ranked 75 out of 150 according to PFF's in depth rankings, then it would be less subjective. Instead, I see many players you called average or below average that are still consistent starters. Linsley, for example, might be a top 10 center.

[Bretsky]

When our GM is nearly all Draft and Develop, you can't f'ck up the draft, or f'ck up decisions on who to keep and who not to keep.
That is partly why I'd say Partial does a pretty dam good job here

[yetisnowman]

I get so sick of the narrative that the Packers are bereft of talent because of their draft position. We have drafted poorly, especially on defense. The Steelers have 8 pro bowlers this year, and not a single one is a top 10 pick. They draft consistently late as well.

Look at the top 5 in the NFL in sacks and their draft position.

Chandler Jones - 21
Calais Campbell - 50
Demarcus Lawrence - 34
Everson Griffen - 100
Cameron Heyward - 31

Look at rushing and receiving leaders as well. It's not littered with top 10 picks and athletic freaks.

The lack of pro-bowlers and all pros in an indictment on TT. How is it not? We have very limited personnel. And we always seem to stand pat as opposed to being aggressive in draft or free agency.

[red]

When our GM is nearly all Draft and Develop, you can't f'ck up the draft, or f'ck up decisions on who to keep and who not to keep.


Exactly

[Zool]

When our GM is nearly all Draft and Develop, you can't f'ck up the draft, or f'ck up decisions on who to keep and who not to keep.
That is partly why I'd say Partial does a pretty dam good job here

You agree with the sentiment is why you appreciate what he did here. I've been saying for multiple years, if you want to evaluate a draft from a specific team's GM, you need to compare what he drafted, vs what the NFL team consensus round slotting was, vs how other teams fared in that same draft by position. Any other analysis is, as Smidgeon put it, subjective.

After you put out your opinion based rankings system, and get called out on it, you might at least define what "good" and "bad" and "average" mean in your opinion. Also good and bad is a pretty weak way to define a draft pick. It seems the only "good" ones were multi year starters who are near pro-bowl level. If the only good draft picks result in that level of player, I guarantee you every GM in the league is shitty at drafting.

[esoxx]

I get so sick of the narrative that the Packers are bereft of talent because of their draft position. We have drafted poorly, especially on defense. The Steelers have 8 pro bowlers this year, and not a single one is a top 10 pick. They draft consistently late as well.

Look at the top 5 in the NFL in sacks and their draft position.

Chandler Jones - 21
Calais Campbell - 50
Demarcus Lawrence - 34
Everson Griffen - 100
Cameron Heyward - 31

Look at rushing and receiving leaders as well. It's not littered with top 10 picks and athletic freaks.

The lack of pro-bowlers and all pros in an indictment on TT. How is it not? We have very limited personnel. And we always seem to stand pat as opposed to being aggressive in draft or free agency.

This is completely spot on.
The excuse making on this site for all things TT is amusing.

[gbgary]

When our GM is nearly all Draft and Develop, you can't f'ck up the draft, or f'ck up decisions on who to keep and who not to keep.
That is partly why I'd say Partial does a pretty dam good job here

yup. can't be one dimensional. that's why the next gm needs to be someone who'll get proactively involved in the free agency and trades to acquire talent.

[hoosier]

You weren't impressed overall because you disagree with the conclusions but that doesn't make them wrong or unfounded. The criteria is black and white. Just because Giacommini and Newhouse eventually found rosters, that doesn't mean they were anything more than a bad starter w/ potential. What player specifically is the evaluation wrong on? I am sure some could be up for debate and I will concede there is a lot of nuance to player evaluations and often times it's difficult to categorize them.

The reality is the drafts in 2011, 2012 and 2013 were terrible for 2016 and 2017 squads.

The only present starters that were offered second contracts by the team are:
Nick Perry - average to above-average starter, nothing special, often injured
Mike Daniels - undersized but above-average starter
David Bakhtiari - special player
Randall Cobb - average to above-average starter, nothing special

That is awfully rough and frankly indisputable. I don't see how someone can disagree with that assessment but to each their own. When applying the Ron Wolfe successful draft philosophy, the Packers should have 9 starters from those 3 drafts. They have 4. That's bad.

I don't quite understand why you're trying to evaluate TT as GM based on this peculiar metric of assessing contributions of the 2011-13 drafts for the 2016 and '17 Packers. Why not look at 2014-16 as well? If you include 2014 then you have to add HHCD, Adams and Linsley--three average+ starters. Include 2015 and you have to add Randall, Montgomery and Rip--three serviceable starters, one of whom still has potential for more.

By contrast, if you want to focus on 2011-13 then you have to ask what those drafts added for the short to intermediate term: the 2012-15 Packers. Those drafts added important contributors for that period who don't show up on your list: Hayward, Lacy, Tretter, and Hyde.

If you want to argue that TT hasn't hit it big in the draft in recent years I have no argument. But I don't think hitting home runs is the best yardstick for measuring a GM's draft savvyness. Draft home runs have a high degree of luck. A better yardstick is whether or not the GM is able to keep the talent level at a consistently high basis. On that measure I would say TT has done has job.

[mraynrand]

The lack of pro-bowlers and all pros in an indictment on TT. How is it not?

because some people don't care about popularity contests. Bottom line is more important: Regular season wins, Playoff appearances, Playoff wins, Championships. These things happen because a GM builds a team. TT is top 5 against his peers in these critical areas. You can't deny it.

[red]

because some people don't care about popularity contests. Bottom line is more important: Regular season wins, Playoff appearances, Playoff wins, Championships. These things happen because a GM builds a team. TT is top 5 against his peers in these critical areas. You can't deny it.

Yup, all that does happen because of one guy, but his name is Aaron not ted

[ZachMN]

Yup, all that does happen because of one guy, but his name is Aaron not ted

HA! YES! Too much Kool Aid around here and the need to back up your opinion with a term paper level analysis.

[mraynrand]

Yup, all that does happen because of one guy, but his name is Aaron not ted

Same old, same old. Who developed Rodgers? What offense is he running? Name the other great Tedford QBs in the NFL. According to you, Rodgers did it all by himself of due to a pure luck pick, spontaneous development that had nothing to do with anyone but Rodgers, and a totally uncontroversial decision to keep him over Favre. I marvel at your absolutely polarized vision. Do you even remember 2010 and how they won against the Bears (twice) and Eagles? Who caught all those crazy throws from Rodgers? Do you even remember Jennings?

[red]

Same old, same old. Who developed Rodgers? What offense is he running? Name the other great Tedford QBs in the NFL. According to you, Rodgers did it all by himself of due to a pure luck pick, spontaneous development that had nothing to do with anyone but Rodgers, and a totally uncontroversial decision to keep him over Favre. I marvel at your absolutely polarized vision. Do you even remember 2010 and how they won against the Bears (twice) and Eagles? Who caught all those crazy throws from Rodgers? Do you even remember Jennings?

Talk about the same old bullshit. Mike McCarthy, the q.v. guru who made Aaron rodger because all of the other Redford qbs were flops. Never mind that right up until the day of the draft most people still thought there was a 50/50 chance that Rodgers could go #1 overall.

And to listen to so many homers talk about what a great job fat mike did in molding a-rod, well he must have done that with every qb that’s come through the door. Why half the starters in the nfl must have been McCarthy pupils. Whoops wrong, none.

Let’s talk about how fat ass scoffed at the idea that they would bring in someone else once a rod went down. Huntley is the guy he said, I’ve spent over 2 years grooming him he said. What a crock of shit

I marvel at your complete head up your ass constant trolling on this site and how it’s ever been allowed to go on for this long

[BZnDallas]

HA! YES! Too much Kool Aid around here and the need to back up your opinion with a term paper level analysis.

You don't think Aaron playing the whole season means more pro bowlers for GB? You're not paying attention if not. Love how everybody here accuses everybody else of not being objective, all the while being subjective themselves. Hahaha

[yetisnowman]

because some people don't care about popularity contests. Bottom line is more important: Regular season wins, Playoff appearances, Playoff wins, Championships. These things happen because a GM builds a team. TT is top 5 against his peers in these critical areas. You can't deny it.

No all pro and pro bowl selections are not simply a popularity contest. That's absurd. Its not like the NBA where MJ and Kobe were all star starters at 40. I like how you parsed this part and ignored the part that shreds your "no difference makers left when the packers pick" narrative. I'm not so blind to say that all of the packers success is due to Aaron . But damn sure I'll contend that the majority is. We have a big enough sample size without him. A listless, slow, unexplosive team with pedestrian talent. TT built a balanced team 5-7 years ago. But honestly minus Davante, Bahktiari, and Rodgers and I could take or leave the rest of this squad we have now.

[BZnDallas]

Teddy boy has his issues. They are well documented. So are his successes. To give all or zero credit to either Aaron or Ted is doing the other a disservice. Its give and take, every year an unknown number of parts are moving in an unknown number of directions. Trying to make it black and white or good and bad is also a disservice although it gives us shit to talk about.

[BZnDallas]

No all pro and pro bowl selections are not simply a popularity contest. That's absurd. Its not like the NBA where MJ and Kobe were all star starters at 40. I like how you parsed this part and ignored the part that shreds your "no difference makers left when the packers pick" narrative. I'm not so blind to say that all of the packers success is due to Aaron . But damn sure I'll contend that the majority is. We have a big enough sample size without him. A listless, slow, unexplosive team with pedestrian talent. TT built a balanced team 5-7 years ago. But honestly minus Davante, Bahktiari, and Rodgers and I could take or leave the rest of this squad we have now.

Take a peak at the 2016 Pro Bowl rosters. Then take a look at the players selected to the 2016 pro bowl but didn't play. You could field a better roster from the 'didn't plays' than you can from the 2 rosters that faced off. When more than 100 players make the pro bowl, it loses quite a bit of its meaning. Popularity contest might not be the best comparison, but making the pro bowl isn't what it used to be.

[call_me_ishmael]

I don't quite understand why you're trying to evaluate TT as GM based on this peculiar metric of assessing contributions of the 2011-13 drafts for the 2016 and '17 Packers. Why not look at 2014-16 as well? If you include 2014 then you have to add HHCD, Adams and Linsley--three average+ starters. Include 2015 and you have to add Randall, Montgomery and Rip--three serviceable starters, one of whom still has potential for more.

Exactly. I think the 2014-2016 drafts are looking pretty darn good. This thread was looking at the 5 year body of work, I added a sixth because it helped make my argument because 2011 draft was really bad :-p


By contrast, if you want to focus on 2011-13 then you have to ask what those drafts added for the short to intermediate term: the 2012-15 Packers. Those drafts added important contributors for that period who don't show up on your list: Hayward, Lacy, Tretter, and Hyde.

If you want to argue that TT hasn't hit it big in the draft in recent years I have no argument. But I don't think hitting home runs is the best yardstick for measuring a GM's draft savvyness. Draft home runs have a high degree of luck. A better yardstick is whether or not the GM is able to keep the talent level at a consistently high basis. On that measure I would say TT has done has job.

I am not saying Ted has done a great job or a bad job. I merely took my draft grades and averaged them out to form a high-school style GPA (A = 4.0, B = 3.0, C = 2.0, D = 1.0, F = 0.0). That value from 2012-2016 was 2.4 GPA so that speaks to itself. He has done a slightly above average job from 2012-2016 based on my grades. The last three years look very good, and the two or three before that look awful. It average out to slightly above average.

I personally do not think average is good enough for drafting when your program's core tenant is draft and development. I am optimistic and feel that with two more strong drafts, the Packers can compete for a super bowl in 2019.

[pbmax]

I get so sick of the narrative that the Packers are bereft of talent because of their draft position. We have drafted poorly, especially on defense. The Steelers have 8 pro bowlers this year, and not a single one is a top 10 pick. They draft consistently late as well.

Look at the top 5 in the NFL in sacks and their draft position.

Chandler Jones - 21
Calais Campbell - 50
Demarcus Lawrence - 34
Everson Griffen - 100
Cameron Heyward - 31

Look at rushing and receiving leaders as well. It's not littered with top 10 picks and athletic freaks.

The lack of pro-bowlers and all pros in an indictment on TT. How is it not? We have very limited personnel. And we always seem to stand pat as opposed to being aggressive in draft or free agency.

I don't agree at ALL on pro bowlers or all pro. All Pro is a better mark, but you aren't going to get more than one or two per team most years.

But I am as amazed as you that the Packers haven't just fallen into a better, more consistent pass rush.

I think there might be some chasing of Ted's own tail. He got Matthews and Raji and had pass rush out the wazoo with vets like Jenkins. Peppers helped the last few years.

But between having plenty of pass rush in 2009-10 and now, they really needed to beef up run defense. It has worked, but they are now bereft of depth that can pass rush. Something has to give here to allow balance.

Quentin Dial and Brooks plus the new ILBs have helped run defense a lot (also Matthews inside plus Perry and Fackrell on edge). Clark shows signs of having both. But there is not enough explosion to get pressure often enough.

[hoosier]

Exactly. I think the 2014-2016 drafts are looking pretty darn good. This thread was looking at the 5 year body of work, I added a sixth because it helped make my argument because 2011 draft was really bad :-p



I am not saying Ted has done a great job or a bad job. I merely took my draft grades and averaged them out to form a high-school style GPA (A = 4.0, B = 3.0, C = 2.0, D = 1.0, F = 0.0). That value from 2012-2016 was 2.4 GPA so that speaks to itself. He has done a slightly above average job from 2012-2016 based on my grades. The last three years look very good, and the two or three before that look awful. It average out to slightly above average.

I personally do not think average is good enough for drafting when your program's core tenant is draft and development. I am optimistic and feel that with two more strong drafts, the Packers can compete for a super bowl in 2019.

All grading scales rely on comparison: between what the person accomplished and either some notion of an average level of competence or a notion of what they could have accomplished. What are you comparing TT's drafts to? Those of his NFL peers? In grading his drafts, how do you account for the fact that GB has almost always been picking in the last quartile of each round?

[pbmax]

Fackrell has taken a step this year and has been pretty reliable in run defense for the last six games or so.

If he steps up in pass rush, it would be just shy of a cure all.

[yetisnowman]

I don't agree at ALL on pro bowlers or all pro. All Pro is a better mark, but you aren't going to get more than one or two per team most years.

But I am as amazed as you that the Packers haven't just fallen into a better, more consistent pass rush.

I think there might be some chasing of Ted's own tail. He got Matthews and Raji and had pass rush out the wazoo with vets like Jenkins. Peppers helped the last few years.

But between having plenty of pass rush in 2009-10 and now, they really needed to beef up run defense. It has worked, but they are now bereft of depth that can pass rush. Something has to give here to allow balance.

Quentin Dial and Brooks plus the new ILBs have helped run defense a lot (also Matthews inside plus Perry and Fackrell on edge). Clark shows signs of having both. But there is not enough explosion to get pressure often enough.

You don't agree 'AT ALL" about pro bowlers and all pros? What does that even mean? Wouldn't you want a handful of pro bowlers as opposed to zero? Or maybe get a 1st or 2nd team all pro more than once every 5 years aside from Aaron? You guys have twisted the argument so much, that pointing out a lack of star players is somehow an irrelevant point.

I see signs from some of the young guys, but not enough consistency to feel assured they can be pieces to truly build around.

[Zool]

I am not saying Ted has done a great job or a bad job. I merely took my draft grades and averaged them out to form a high-school style GPA (A = 4.0, B = 3.0, C = 2.0, D = 1.0, F = 0.0). That value from 2012-2016 was 2.4 GPA so that speaks to itself. He has done a slightly above average job from 2012-2016 based on my grades. The last three years look very good, and the two or three before that look awful. It average out to slightly above average.

Based off what comparison? You call it an average, but an average would have to include all 31 other teams drafts over that time with successes and failures determined off your ranking. Giving randomly assigned grades to draft picks based off your personal opinion is ridiculous.

[Bretsky]

You agree with the sentiment is why you appreciate what he did here. I've been saying for multiple years, if you want to evaluate a draft from a specific team's GM, you need to compare what he drafted, vs what the NFL team consensus round slotting was, vs how other teams fared in that same draft by position. Any other analysis is, as Smidgeon put it, subjective.

After you put out your opinion based rankings system, and get called out on it, you might at least define what "good" and "bad" and "average" mean in your opinion. Also good and bad is a pretty weak way to define a draft pick. It seems the only "good" ones were multi year starters who are near pro-bowl level. If the only good draft picks result in that level of player, I guarantee you every GM in the league is shitty at drafting.



I have no idea at all what you are talking about here; I give credit to those who put in extra effort to accumulate date.............I didn't accumulate a thing

[Bretsky]

This is completely spot on.
The excuse making on this site for all things TT is amusing.


I would agree and I'm not arguing TT is bad. He's ok but when he chooses to leave I'll be fine with it

[Zool]

I have no idea at all what you are talking about here; I give credit to those who put in extra effort to accumulate date.............I didn't accumulate a thing

You’re either drunk or didn’t figure out I was talking about Partials arbitrary grading system for each pick/draft. Or both.

[call_me_ishmael]

Based off what comparison? You call it an average, but an average would have to include all 31 other teams drafts over that time with successes and failures determined off your ranking. Giving randomly assigned grades to draft picks based off your personal opinion is ridiculous.

What's not clear? The criteria for a good draft has been laid out in the post. It derives from the Ron Wolfe judgement of a draft, where three starters is the sign of a successful draft. Based on that metric as a good draft, the average draft since 2012 has been slightly above average, where average is defined as half-way between really bad and really good.

There is no team vs team comparison here nor a GM vs GM comparison. It is simply looking at the Packers draft picks in isolation and the known/presumptive successes/failures there. Basically, the goal was to find out why they have so many holes on their team this year compared to say 2014 or 2010.



Grading scale:
3 starters, 2 good, 1 average/bad = A (4.0)
3 starters, 1 good, 2 average/bad = B (3.0)
2 starters, 1 good, 1 average/bad = C (2.0)
2 starters, 2 average/bad = D (1.0)
1 starter, 1 good = D (0.0)
1 or less starter, bad = F


If somebody wants to dive into each players PFF rankings or do a team vs team comparison, I'm all ears, but those are both significantly more effort than I care to spend. I was mainly interested in this data for myself, and found it to be an interesting. I truly believe the 2011-2013 paint the picture of the 2016 and 2017 Packers and the holes they have. For those thinking I'm being a hater, I am definitely not as I have graded out the more recent drafts and they score very well according to the scale, and if they continue and APRH the Packers are poised to compete for ARod's second superbowl in 2019 or 2020.

[Zool]

What's not clear? The criteria for a good draft has been laid out in the post. It derives from the Ron Wolfe judgement of a draft, where three starters is the sign of a successful draft. Based on that metric as a good draft, he average draft since 2012 has been slightly above average, where average is half-way between really bad and really good.

I think I’ve made myself clear enough. Calling a draft average without co paring it to any other teams in the NFL is not a ranking system. Calling a player good, bad, or average is your personal opinion not a fact.

[Bretsky]

I'll say this right out. Bach deserved Pro Bowl Status. Rodgers, Devante, and Bach are centers of teams

We have none on defense. You can praise TT for the offense, and you can shred him for he defense.

NFL Championships.....wonder if the untouchable one will ever go beyond Fart in the Wind Status

[Zool]

I think next year we’ll be saying the same about Clark and Williams.

And Randall (/ducks)

[Bretsky]

You’re either drunk or didn’t figure out I was talking about Partials arbitrary grading system for each pick/draft. Or both.

lol

I thought you were drunk and mistaking Partials Detailed effort for mine

I'm one of the many that shares opinions w/o collecting much date to support anything I say....lol

[Bretsky]

I think I’ve made myself clear enough. Calling a draft average without co paring it to any other teams in the NFL is not a ranking system. Calling a player good, bad, or average is your personal opinion not a fact.

To his credit, Partial made way more effort in here than anybody else.

I'd love for somebody to map out a 5 year comparison if the acquisitions...both draft and free agency...of teams that are drafting around GB. Pittsburg would seem to be the obvious choice. You might bring in NE as well.

But they both utilized free agency more than Green Bay......which.....makes it more important TT not f'ck up with draft and develop and let stars walk out of the house

[Bretsky]

I think next year we’ll be saying the same about Clark and Williams.

And Randall (/ducks)


You think Michael Clark is going to be an above average player?

Williams might develop into an average starter; honestly to me Jones shows more

Randall is probably the most talented player in our secondary; he will develop if he keeps his head out of his ass

[call_me_ishmael]

I think I’ve made myself clear enough. Calling a draft average without co paring it to any other teams in the NFL is not a ranking system. Calling a player good, bad, or average is your personal opinion not a fact.

What does comparing one Packers draft to another Packers draft have to do with any other team?? I understand what you think this should be, but that's not what it is nor what it was intended to be.

There is no metric to determine whether a player is good, bad or average. It's always subjective. What's your point? These are *my* rankings. If they were Mike Mayock's or TT rankings, they'd still be subjective.

I am not really seeing your point here. There are way too many variables to compare one team's draft to another, so why not compare historical trends for the same team? That's what this is.

[Zool]

Was Lawrence Guy a bad pick? Was Franklin? Was Terrance Murphy? Brad Jones made 36 starts for the Packers. Was he a good pick?

How many starts does a player have to make to be considered a good pick and over how many years does he have to make those starts? Do they have to be starts for the Packers?

If a team drafts 1 slot after the Packers and gets 5 career long starters, and the Packers get 3 starters from the same draft who only start 1 season each, is that a good or bad draft?

Do you include UDFA in your analysis?

[Zool]

You think Michael Clark is going to be an above average player?

Williams might develop into an average starter; honestly to me Jones shows more

Randall is probably the most talented player in our secondary; he will develop if he keeps his head out of his ass

Kenny not Michael. Jones will be forever a tease who’s always dinged up.

[Bretsky]

Was Lawrence Guy a bad pick? Was Franklin? Was Terrance Murphy? Brad Jones made 36 starts for the Packers. Was he a good pick?

How many starts does a player have to make to be considered a good pick and over how many years does he have to make those starts? Do they have to be starts for the Packers?

If a team drafts 1 slot after the Packers and gets 5 career long starters, and the Packers get 3 starters from the same draft who only start 1 season each, is that a good or bad draft?

Do you include UDFA in your analysis?


Come on Man

He gave his criteria, which went back about 5 or 6 years.

Lawrence Guy; is he within the timeframe ? Ted gets credit for drafting him but more importantly it looks like he made he mistake of cutting him.

Is Terrance Murphy or Franklyn within the timeframe ? Murphy seems forever back

UDFA; why would you include those ? Everybody knows that is a recruiting binge and whoever recruits the best gets there guy. It's not like Ted found any of these guys when others didn't know about them. Does Ted even recruit these guys or do others ? Most teams hit or miss on a few of those. Occasionally we hit bigger. But Sam Shields was being pursued by MANY teams. Why would you pull in UDFA when they are really not expected to make a team. Are thy superstars if they just don't get cut ? It was smart to leave them off

[Bretsky]

Kenny not Michael. Jones will be forever a tease who’s always dinged up.

oops; agree. Someday Kenny has a great chance to be on that list but he's not here yet. Daniels may be our best defensive player currently. We could all argue about it since currently our defense really doesn't have a star. Hopefully they develop....or get drafted this year.

[Zool]

Come on Man

He gave his criteria, which went back about 5 or 6 years.

Lawrence Guy; is he within the timeframe ? Ted gets credit for drafting him but more importantly it looks like he made he mistake of cutting him.

Is Terrance Murphy or Franklyn within the timeframe ? Murphy seems forever back

UDFA; why would you include those ? Everybody knows that is a recruiting binge and whoever recruits the best gets there guy. It's not like Ted found any of these guys when others didn't know about them. Does Ted even recruit these guys or do others ? Most teams hit or miss on a few of those. Occasionally we hit bigger. But Sam Shields was being pursued by MANY teams. Why would you pull in UDFA when they are really not expected to make a team. Are thy superstars if they just don't get cut ? It was smart to leave them off

The off topic convo was about grading drafts to fill out the poll. I asked simple questions in regards to how the good average bad was chosen. Apparently it means starter or not starter. So I asked these as follow ups.

I’m not saying where I think Thompson falls in so far as his ability to do his job. I guess I’ll say that enough other teams have commented on how good he is at his job and take their opinion.

And yes if you’re grading a GM based off his ability to acquire talent, you have to take UDFA into account. Otherwise, the already skewed data set is skewed even farther to attempt to prove the original point.

BTW, Frank Zombo has started 20 games over the last 2 years. UDFA.

[ThunderDan]

No all pro and pro bowl selections are not simply a popularity contest. That's absurd. Its not like the NBA where MJ and Kobe were all star starters at 40. I like how you parsed this part and ignored the part that shreds your "no difference makers left when the packers pick" narrative. I'm not so blind to say that all of the packers success is due to Aaron . But damn sure I'll contend that the majority is. We have a big enough sample size without him. A listless, slow, unexplosive team with pedestrian talent. TT built a balanced team 5-7 years ago. But honestly minus Davante, Bahktiari, and Rodgers and I could take or leave the rest of this squad we have now.

Except Jeff Saturday was a Pro Bowl starter his year in GB when we benched him for terrible play.

I’ll agree that All-Pro has meaning.

[mraynrand]

Take a peak at the 2016 Pro Bowl rosters. Then take a look at the players selected to the 2016 pro bowl but didn't play. You could field a better roster from the 'didn't plays' than you can from the 2 rosters that faced off. When more than 100 players make the pro bowl, it loses quite a bit of its meaning. Popularity contest might not be the best comparison, but making the pro bowl isn't what it used to be.

I just think it's a terrible way to measure GM success. It would be absolute bottom of my criteria. Bottom line for me is actual performance success - wins and loses regular season and post season. In that regard, TT has been exemplary - top 5 among his peers. It is indisputable.

[mraynrand]

In 2011, when Manning went down for the Colts, and they went 2-14, they had the following Pro Bowlers on their team:


Reggie Wayne
Jeff Saturday
Dallas Clark
Joseph Addai
Dwight Freeney
Robert Mathis
Antoine Bethea
Adam Vinatieri
Pat McAfree
Kerry Collins

They also had:
Pierre Garcon

Those guys were worth two wins. But they won some popularity contests.

[Pugger]

In 2011, when Manning went down for the Colts, and they went 2-14, they had the following Pro Bowlers on their team:


Reggie Wayne
Jeff Saturday
Dallas Clark
Joseph Addai
Dwight Freeney
Robert Mathis
Antoine Bethea
Adam Vinatieri
Pat McAfree
Kerry Collins

They also had:
Pierre Garcon

Those guys were worth two wins. But they won some popularity contests.

This shows ya why a good QB is essential in this league if you want to win. Having a decent defense is essential once you get to the playoffs and this is why we've been coming up short since 2010.

[pbmax]

You don't agree 'AT ALL" about pro bowlers and all pros? What does that even mean? Wouldn't you want a handful of pro bowlers as opposed to zero? Or maybe get a 1st or 2nd team all pro more than once every 5 years aside from Aaron? You guys have twisted the argument so much, that pointing out a lack of star players is somehow an irrelevant point.

I see signs from some of the young guys, but not enough consistency to feel assured they can be pieces to truly build around.

Don't agree that pro bowls or all pro designations serve as any kind of useful yardstick for the quality of your roster.

[pbmax]

I think next year we’ll be saying the same about Clark and Williams.

And Randall (/ducks)

I am with you all the way on this one. Jones too.

[pbmax]

I love this thread.

Welcome back PackerRats. Maybe we need two years of disappointing football to fully revive the board.

[Smidgeon]

I love this thread.

Welcome back PackerRats. Maybe we need two years of disappointing football to fully revive the board.

Me too. Good, spirited discussion.

[Bretsky]

I love this thread.

Welcome back PackerRats. Maybe we need two years of disappointing football to fully revive the board.

My threads are meant to foster spirited fights..........lol..obviously I fail with most of them :)

[call_me_ishmael]

Was Lawrence Guy a bad pick? Was Franklin? Was Terrance Murphy? Brad Jones made 36 starts for the Packers. Was he a good pick?

How many starts does a player have to make to be considered a good pick and over how many years does he have to make those starts? Do they have to be starts for the Packers?

If a team drafts 1 slot after the Packers and gets 5 career long starters, and the Packers get 3 starters from the same draft who only start 1 season each, is that a good or bad draft?

Do you include UDFA in your analysis?

No UDFA. Again, I did this for me. If you want to do that analysis, feel free. I don't have time for that stuff. It's funny, I see some criticism from people over the work I've done, but they've done nothing at all!

Were Franklin, Murphy, etc bad picks? I dunno, that's a matter of perspective. The end result is yes but should TT be held accountable for it? Probably not.

Jones bad pick? No he's a fine pick for a 7th rounder he overachieved but he was still a bad starter. I don't get what is so hard about this. The metric is 3 good starters in a draft. If he isn't a good starter, he is either an average starter or a bad starter. I feel like you're overthinking this. It's really quite simple. Good pick that contributed, but bad starter we all hated.

Other team: Irrelevant to discussion, the stated goal for Packers under Ron Wolfe was 3 solid starters to be a good draft. No other teams are considered for the criteria nor should they be.

If you get an average starter out the 7th round or something, that's a great pick. If you get a couple years of below average starting out of a 7th rounder, I'd argue that's still a pretty darn good pick. This is why I didn't rate individual picks or even players beyond how a player is generally viewed (good, solid, average, bad, etc) and used that determination + second contract as starter to form the grades.

[Smidgeon]

I just want to point out the Seahawks missed the playoffs even with their star QB all year. For all of the teeth-gnashers out there about the state of the team, it's a testament to TT that they remain good even with their QB. This league is more than just a one person show. Rodgers couldn't do it without other pieces too.

[red]

Ted Thompson died 5 years ago in a car crash

A local Green Bay scientists told the team he could re animate him and that the man could continue to serve his duties

He is stuck saying just simple words, that’s why we have so many guys named Adams, or jones, or dix or king. Sometimes he is able to mumble odd sounds out, that is how we ended up with fackerall


https://youtu.be/VfoaWHsdTNU

[woodbuck27]

Was Lawrence Guy a bad pick? Was Franklin? Was Terrance Murphy? Brad Jones made 36 starts for the Packers. Was he a good pick?

How many starts does a player have to make to be considered a good pick and over how many years does he have to make those starts? Do they have to be starts for the Packers?

If a team drafts 1 slot after the Packers and gets 5 career long starters, and the Packers get 3 starters from the same draft who only start 1 season each, is that a good or bad draft?

Do you include UDFA in your analysis?

Good Draft Picks make or are close to making Pro Bowls.

[yetisnowman]

In 2011, when Manning went down for the Colts, and they went 2-14, they had the following Pro Bowlers on their team:


Reggie Wayne
Jeff Saturday
Dallas Clark
Joseph Addai
Dwight Freeney
Robert Mathis
Antoine Bethea
Adam Vinatieri
Pat McAfree
Kerry Collins

They also had:
Pierre Garcon

Those guys were worth two wins. But they won some popularity contests.

So we are factoring in former pro bowlers as it pertains to a current teams success? Wayne, Mathis, Freeney were the only relevant current pro bowl players on the team at the time. Pretty ridiculous argument. Not to mention using the fg kicker, punter, and backup qb to make your point.

I mean the Seahawks had pro bowlers Wilson, Lacy, Graham, Baldwin, and Lockett on the same offfense this year and were still below average on that side of the ball. Clearly having pro bowl caliber players means nothing and is a poor way to gauge a GM.

Since it is such a useless metric in evaluating team building, shouldn't you be able to find a successful team in recent memory that has had 1 or fewer pro bowlers?

Lets look at the conference champs since the Packers won the super bowl and how many pro bowlers they had on their roster.

2017-Falcons 6
Patriots 4
2016-Panthers 10
Broncos 4
2015-Seahawks 6
Patriots 5
2014-Seahawks 5
Broncos 5
2013-49ers 8
Ravens 6
2012-Giants 3
Patriots 8
2011-Packers 6
Steelers 4

Its weird that the teams with the most "popular" players seem to contend for championships.

[call_me_ishmael]

The scope is this question is the past 5 years. What great player has he acquired in the past 5 years? David Bahktiari. That's it.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/dougherty/2017/12/22/dougherty-vikings-getting-better-packers-draft/977791001/

Grading scale:
3 starters, 2 good, 1 average/bad = A (4.0)
3 starters, 1 good, 2 average/bad = B (3.0)
2 starters, 1 good, 1 average/bad = C (2.0)
2 starters, 2 average/bad = D (1.0)
1 starter, 1 good = D (0.0)
1 or less starter, bad = F


2012 - Two second contracts as starter, one good, one average. Draft grade is C due to 2 starters where only is a good player.
Perry - average
Worthy - bad
Hayward - average, gone
Daniels - good
McMillion - bad
Manning - bad
Datko - bad
Coleman - bad

2013 - One second contact as starter, 1 special, no one else note worthy. Draft grade is D due to one starter, albeit the Packers second best player at a key position.
Datone Jones - bad, gone
Eddie Lacy - average, gone
Bakhtiari - special
Tretter - below average, gone
Franklin - bad, gone
Hyde - average, gone
Boyd - bad
Palmer - bad
Johnson - bad
Dorsey - bad
Barrington - bad

2014 - Three (presumably) second contracts as starters, Two good players, one average player. Draft grade is A
Dix - good (historically, down year)
Adams - good
Thorton - bad
Rodgers - below average
Bradford - bad
Linsley - average
Abbrederis - bad
Goodson - bad
Janis - average

Projecting 2015 - Presumably 2-3 second contracts as starter though one is a fullback. Two average players, other show potential but are constantly hurt. Draft grade is C at best. Randall is an average #1 at best (that's being generous). Ripkowski is an average fullback (irrelevant). Ryan is nothing special. Rollins and Monty have potential but are always hurt.
Randall - average
Rollins - bad (so far)
Montgomery - bad (so far)
Ryan - below average
Hundley - average
Ripkowski - average
Ringo - bad
Backman - bad

Projecting 2016 - Presumably 3 starters signed to second contracts as starters. Clark is looking pretty darn good. Martinez and Lowry are average starters at their positions. Draft grade is an B
Clark - good
Spriggs - bad
Fackrell - bad
Martinez - average
Lowry - average
Davis - bad
Murphy - bad

Projecting 2017 - Jury is still out but there is no reason to suspect a star out of this class. There is a lot of starting potential here but we'll see. The jury is still out.
King - good (give him benefit of doubt)
Jones - bad so far, incomplete
Adams - incomplete
Biegel - incomplete
Williams - average
Jones - average
Amichia - bad
Mays - bad


Summary:
GPA - ~2.4 on average

Based on my scale and some basic math, TT's GPA is 2.4 over the past 5 years. That's not very good. It's time to make a change here. Part of it is since 2012 so many of his draftees have been very injury prone. They have the medical info ahead of time so perhaps they're taking too many risks there.

His best draft by far is 2014 with two above average starters and one average one. His worst year was 2013 where there is not a single player still on the squad aside from the excellent Bakhtiari.

2015 has Ty Montgomery remaining on the roster. 2016 looking okay I guess. Too soon to tell with 2017. I know hindsight is 20/20 but I think when comparing talent it was obvious how much better Carl Lawson is/was then Vin Biegel. What was TT thinking?

[Harlan Huckleby]

witch hunt!

[smuggler]

Tretter and Franklin were bad? Tretter is a good center and Franklin broke his neck!

[call_me_ishmael]

Tretter and Franklin were bad? Tretter is a good center and Franklin broke his neck!

Tretter didn't earn a second contract here since he was always hurt and Franklin was a wasted pick in the end. The outcomes for those two were poor.

[Smidgeon]

Heyward is a top cb in the league.
Hyde made the probowl.

Now to show that a 2.4 is bad, grade every other GM on the "I'm glad he's gone" scale.

[Pugger]

Tretter didn't earn a second contract here since he was always hurt and Franklin was a wasted pick in the end. The outcomes for those two were poor.

Yes, but nobody complained when the picks were made. It does show you gotta have some luck too.

[red]

Well, it’s 3 years so we can grade 2015

Looks like a solid D

Got a backup RB and a JAG ILB left from the draft

[pbmax]

Tretter didn't earn a second contract here since he was always hurt and Franklin was a wasted pick in the end. The outcomes for those two were poor.

Does it matter if he earned a second contract with the Browns? https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cleveland-browns/j.c.-tretter-12403/

[Bretsky]

playing devil's advocate. It's a pretty well known Draft and Develop strategy that you pay to retain your best players. So Thanksted should be downgraded if/when he lets a best player go. I'm not really referring to Tretter here.

[pbmax]

playing devil's advocate. It's a pretty well known Draft and Develop strategy that you pay to retain your best players. So Thanksted should be downgraded if/when he lets a best player go. I'm not really referring to Tretter here.

Ishmael was talking about drafting success. But if you want to consider the whole term of a player's career, I think Ted could be docked a point or two for letting Tretter go. He would have been good depth the last year or two.

[Joemailman]

Ishmael was talking about drafting success. But if you want to consider the whole term of a player's career, I think Ted could be docked a point or two for letting Tretter go. He would have been good depth the last year or two.

That'a assuming he would have wanted to be a top backup here, when he could be a starting Center somewhere else. I think most guys want to play.

[call_me_ishmael]

Yes, but nobody complained when the picks were made. It does show you gotta have some luck too.

Exactly. I'm not criticizing Ted. I am looking purely at the outcome and results n years after the fact. I think it's pretty easy to see the quality of drafts decreased and the 2013 draft killed the Packers depth. 2015 is looking like an equally large depth killer. The data for the most part speaks for itself.

[call_me_ishmael]

Does it matter if he earned a second contract with the Browns? https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cleveland-browns/j.c.-tretter-12403/

Not really. He can be a terrific player for them but it doesn't change the fact the front office let him walk. They did not think he was worth the contract Cleveland offered him so they declined to match. Whether he is or not is sort of irrelevant to the outcome and career with the Packers. He was always hurt here so I get it.

[pbmax]

Not really. He can be a terrific player for them but it doesn't change the fact the front office let him walk. They did not think he was worth the contract Cleveland offered him so they declined to match. Whether he is or not is sort of irrelevant I guess.

But its a measure of drafting success that he is coveted and the reason the Packers did not pay him was because they found a better option.

[Joemailman]

Not really. He can be a terrific player for them but it doesn't change the fact the front office let him walk. They did not think he was worth the contract Cleveland offered him so they declined to match. Whether he is or not is sort of irrelevant to the outcome and career with the Packers. He was always hurt here so I get it.

Tretter was an unrestricted free agent. He could sign wherever he wanted. He didn't have to give the Packers the opportunity to match. The Packers had 2 starting quality Centers. They preferred Linsley. It wouldn't have made any sense for Tretter to stay here.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Tretter was an unrestricted free agent. He could sign wherever he wanted. He didn't have to give the Packers the opportunity to match. The Packers had 2 starting quality Centers. They preferred Linsley. It wouldn't have made any sense for Tretter to stay here.

A few yrs ago, NO wted a strtin caliber C n a 1st for curnt Pack TE Jim G. Todd had 2 C n a btr 1st than Sea.

Incpt, thy name is Todd.

[smuggler]

Tretter played in every game last year and was graded as a better player than Linsley... by PFF at least.

[Zool]

Janis - Average. I stopped reading there.

[Zool]

A few yrs ago, NO wted a strtin caliber C n a 1st for curnt Pack TE Jim G. Todd had 2 C n a btr 1st than Sea.

Incpt, thy name is Todd.

That's illegible and stupid. Kudos on the two-fer