SNAPPER STOCKPILING STRATEGY OF DRAFT PICKS

[Bretsky]

TT has certainly mastered this art; I must admit I was a bit surprised this year.

Before the draft TT noted that this draft was not as talent deep as previous ones. What I took out of that is he may not play the stockpiling game as much as in the past. I was wrong.

The art of stockpiling draft picks by trading down certainly gives you more room for failure; everybody will hit and miss on some so having more gives you the better chance.

In general, I have no complaints about the Snapper Stockpiling Strategy. Last year we seemed to add a lot of youthful depth that was too bare after the Sherman era.

But looking at our roster deeper, I'm left to wonder how we have numerous young players with potential and we might not be able to keep them all.

Going a step further, I also wonder if this strategy has left us at a point where we are ripping through players to replace the bottom fifth of our roster with players that are pretty much the same.

Thoughts ????

[Tarlam!]

Your thinking is dead on. Well, at least it's dead on with my thinking! :oops:

I actually suspected TT would go up and get Adrian Peterson, if not Marshawn Lynch when he said draft depth was shallow.

The strategy is a good one only, if he hits on more than he misses, since he is reluctant to add mediocre FAs, even if they are better than low round rookies.

This draft seems designed to yield starters in a few years at say, OT.

Still, I like the Harrel pick now that it's sunk in. I am also harboring quiet confidence that Wynn will prove he should have been a first day choice by getting his act together.

Ultimately, Bretsky, we can only have 53 players and a handful on the scout team. I suspect we will have a revolving door at 3rd/4th string, which isn't great for the team.

[Joemailman]

I have a feeling trading down is in TT's blood. If you have a strong deep draft, you can justify trading down by saying that high quality players are available in the middle rounds. If you have a draft that lacks quality depth, you can justify trading down by saying that the best players on the board in say, round 3, are no better than the players who will be available in round 5. My sense is that TT will always believe that by trading down, he can get multiple players who, although flawed in some ways, fit well into the system.

[RashanGary]

Corey Williams will be the big test if we are going to let our own impact guys go. I think we sign him long term this season or next off season during his RFA year. We will have Harrell, Williams and Pickett for a couple more years and we will truely dominate the middle of the line, something we havn't done on defense in a long ass time.

We still need to find a pass rushing DE to replace KGB but right now our DL is looking very strong and deep in relation to most NFL teams. We also have playmaking LB's lined up behind them so I am excited to see this defense line up and make plays this season. Thanks to Thompsons BPA approach, we might just get a chance to see a truely dominate front 7 for te first time since Reggie. We could have had a WR, which we needed. Instead we might have a dominate defense. I'll take that every time.

[RashanGary]

I keep saying this, but Hawk is my biggest bright spot this off season. His work ethic combined with the way he played last year has me pretty excited for 07. Harrell is going to make an impact on this team by opening things up for Hawk/Barnett.

Hawk, C. Williams, Harrell, Barnett, Jenkins, Pickett, Kampman, Harris, Woodson, Collins and company are a good, solid unit. If Hawk becomes a premier A-1 defender, we just made a good defense great. I have a lot of optimism for this season. I truely believe football is a young mans game and our young guys are going to physically outmatch the opponent pretty consistantly.

[run pMc]

It's a good strategy when you are rebuilding.
If you are a team that's made the playoffs for the last few years and a shot at a conference championship, you probably need to dust off the checkbook, sign a quality FA or two, and either stand pat, trade out for future picks, or trade up for that playmaker to put you "over the edge".

[CaliforniaCheez]

The Packers were tied for second in acquiring the most draft picks of the 2005 draft with 11 picks(Tampa had 12).

In 2006 and 2007 the Packers have had the most draft picks.

That is a total of 34 Thompson draft picks in three years.

The Packers got 3 or 4 starters out of the 2005 draft depending on your opinion of Underwood and Whitticker. With 6 still on the roster.

The Packers got 4 starters in the 2006 draft so far. 10 still on the roster

In the 2007 draft it is too early to tell.

Let's say the Packers continue this mode of drafting double digit picks and about 7 making the squad every year. That is not enough to keep a sustained roster of 53 as it will take 7 to 8 years get 53 players and the average career is between 4 and 5 years. Getting 4 starters a year in a draft still requires 6+ years to sustain 22 starters plus specialists.

The team needs to acquire 10 new players a year, on average to sustain the roster.
Now when a team is good it may not require so many players and when it is bad it needs more but on average 10 new players on the 53 roster.

If 7 are draft picks (Under the Thompson plan) the other 3 have to come from Free Agency, undrafted rookies, trades etc.

It cannot be done through the draft alone. The draft is the bulk of new player acquisitions. If 10 new players is the average for sustaining a team, then more than 10 must be acquired to improve.

10 new players from 2005 are on the current roster.
38 new players from 2006 are on the current roster.
24 new players so far are on the roster or are unsigned draft picks in 2007.

Of course not all will make the team.

These are general trends of course and there are exceptions to the general trends.

Some times a team goes through many players looking for a good one.

Something to think about when comparing the ups and downs of a football team over the years.

[RashanGary]

Nice point cheese. There is undrafted FA's, minimum waiver guys, NFL Europe guys and regular free agency.

I think you have to be oppertunistic in every avenue like Cullen Jenkins for example or Ruvell Martin. I just have a problem with the high priced FA's. I think they almost always hurt you.

[Packnut]

Nice point cheese. There is undrafted FA's, minimum waiver guys, NFL Europe guys and regular free agency.

I think you have to be oppertunistic in every avenue like Cullen Jenkins for example or Ruvell Martin. I just have a problem with the high priced FA's. I think they almost always hurt you.


Woodson is a prime example of why your thinking on FA's is wrong. It's a quick easy method of adding talent. The trick is ya just gotta know who to sign and who to stay away from. That requires a ton of work. Countless hours of game film and talking to team-mates of said player to try and determine character. You also have to determine the players strengths with the scheme you run.

[Spaulding]

I'm not so sure on that with regard to FA. The risk associated with the big contract, the impact to team chemistry when you're paying an outside player big bucks could have a major negative impact.

I think you only go for broke on a big name FA when:

A) You're the one or two players away from pushing for the Superbowl
B) He's a pro-bowl player that the current roster will respect and learn from and
is a leader in the locker room
C) You've got a crap load of cap room and nothing else to spend it on

Given the Packers current situation, I only see option C like the Woodson signing and thankfully that has so far worked out well. Personally, I like TT's philosophy of drafting hungry players mostly with leadership characteristics (Hawk, Harrell, Jones, etc.). Short of Reggie White, what other FA signings have been key to our francise? Some might argue Keith Jackson or Sean Jones and both played a part but without Reggie on the team the signings might have turned out to be a fiasco. Heck Jackson may never have reported and Jones effectiveness might never have been seen.

A hungry young team with the right coaching, chemistry and old school leadership (Favre, Harris, etc.) will hopefully make more strides than a high priced team of FA signings (most recently Redskins, Browns, etc.).

Ultimately, if a team pays it's own players, they will likely play hard and push each other with the thought that they don't need to shop themselves to get paid when their contract comes up. This simple change in mentality I think is often overlooked. How do you bond with the guy next to you knowing he's always thinking I need to produce so I can hit the FA market? Who knows the value of a player better than the team on which he's on and sees him practice and play day in and out?

I like the direction of this team and I think this is a team that will bring attitude and has bright future.

With that, anybody know the current stock price of whoever produces Kool-Aid as I need to buy some serious stock in it to supply my optimistic thirst.

[wist43]

You guys have hit on most of the prescient points wrt to TT's philosophies and trading down...

There's a time and place for everything. You can't keep drafting 11-12 players every year... all you accomplish is turning over the bottom end of the roster year after year.

At some point you have to swing for the fences on a position of need, or a can't miss stud regardless of position. Since TT never, ever, addresses needs, I doubt this will ever happen.

Some will argue that TT addressed needs by taking Jackson and Jones... but, there's a severe drop off from those guys to the potential difference makers that can only be had at the top of the draft, or with a big $$$ FA contract.

I don't see TT ever adjusting his approach... as someone said, "it's in his blood". I think TT is a good talent evaluator, and will ultimately build a decent team, but I think we're looking at perenniel 8-8/10-6 teams that really don't have a chance to win it all.

Taking further into account the fact that Favre's days are numbered, and the schemes they run on both sides of the ball, i.e. "midget ball" on offense, and the passive "anti-blitz" scheme they run on defense... I think it's very unlikely they'll ever be able to put it all together and bring a championship back to GB.

[GoPackGo]

You guys have hit on most of the prescient points wrt to TT's philosophies and trading down...

There's a time and place for everything. You can't keep drafting 11-12 players every year... all you accomplish is turning over the bottom end of the roster year after year.

At some point you have to swing for the fences on a position of need, or a can't miss stud regardless of position. Since TT never, ever, addresses needs, I doubt this will ever happen.

Some will argue that TT addressed needs by taking Jackson and Jones... but, there's a severe drop off from those guys to the potential difference makers that can only be had at the top of the draft, or with a big $$$ FA contract.

I don't see TT ever adjusting his approach... as someone said, "it's in his blood". I think TT is a good talent evaluator, and will ultimately build a decent team, but I think we're looking at perenniel 8-8/10-6 teams that really don't have a chance to win it all.

Taking further into account the fact that Favre's days are numbered, and the schemes they run on both sides of the ball, i.e. "midget ball" on offense, and the passive "anti-blitz" scheme they run on defense... I think it's very unlikely they'll ever be able to put it all together and bring a championship back to GB.

I agree that at some point you have to swing for the fences but....
I don't think you swing for the fences until you have built a strong team through the draft and you just need that little addition to your team to put you over the top.
As far as Jackson and Jones.......
What RB did you want to draft? Peterson and Lynch were both gone by our 1st pick.
What WR did you want to draft? All of the 1st and 2nd round talent (minus C. Johnson)didn't seem to be that great.
Let TT evaluate talent and when he gets us close, if he fails to swing for the fences, then we call for his head.

[retailguy]

I don't see TT ever adjusting his approach... as someone said, "it's in his blood". I think TT is a good talent evaluator, and will ultimately build a decent team, but I think we're looking at perenniel 8-8/10-6 teams that really don't have a chance to win it all.



This is EXACTLY what Thompson and staff built in Seattle. Good, solid team, but WON'T ever win the Super Bowl.

[wist43]

I actually like Jackson, just as I like Morency... but, they're very similar backs - and, since I don't view Morency as an every down player... did TT spend a 2nd round pick on a PT player??? or worse, a backup.

Who drafts a player in the 2nd round with the expectation that he'll be a good backup???

As for Jones, don't know much about him - except that he's pretty good sized, strong, good hands, and can't run. He'll get PT b/c of his draft status, but he was a huge reach. Jones is TT's "I'm smarter than you" pick.

Is Jones better than Carlyle Holliday??? Holliday played pretty well at the end of last year... does picking Jones bump Holliday off the roster??? If so, and he's basically the same thing as Holliday, how does that make the team better???

As many have been pointing out... TT's approach, at some point, just keeps turning the bottom of the roster over and over again.

[Patler]

I can't fault TT for accumulating draft picks and players at least to this point. The roster needed whole-sale changes in my opinion. Eventually, there will be a need to get the one, two or three keys that are needed. I doubt they are there yet.

[Partial]

I actually like Jackson, just as I like Morency... but, they're very similar backs - and, since I don't view Morency as an every down player... did TT spend a 2nd round pick on a PT player??? or worse, a backup.

Who drafts a player in the 2nd round with the expectation that he'll be a good backup???

As for Jones, don't know much about him - except that he's pretty good sized, strong, good hands, and can't run. He'll get PT b/c of his draft status, but he was a huge reach. Jones is TT's "I'm smarter than you" pick.

Is Jones better than Carlyle Holliday??? Holliday played pretty well at the end of last year... does picking Jones bump Holliday off the roster??? If so, and he's basically the same thing as Holliday, how does that make the team better???

As many have been pointing out... TT's approach, at some point, just keeps turning the bottom of the roster over and over again.

Morency is a free agent after this year. If he doesn't perform Jackson becomes the starter.

[CaliforniaCheez]

Well you hope that draft picks continue to improve like Driver and Kampmann continued to improve. That depth guys work their way up to starters and then quality starters.

One hopes to find a Tauscher or Colston in the 7th round but those are rare.

However the process has to be supplemented with free agency,

The quality of the team determines decisions of quality vs. quantity.

Blanket statements cannot be made.

The long term is being addressed. Older players like the starting OT's do have replacements already on the team. Quality replacements for the aging CB will be.

Ted has addressed the depth of the team fairly well. It took some discipline to do that.

The cap status in 2005 led to cutting guys like Sharper and Wahle. Their quality is difficult to replace and to date has not.

Sometimes what you're shopping for is not available.

I think we will begin to see a shift to quality as the team climbs above .500.

[Scott Campbell]

Ted inherited the Sherminator's rapidly declining roster, and a lousy short term salary cap situation. I think he's stopped the bleeding on the roster situation, but it remains to be seen if they can take the next steps up to contender status. His conservative approach to FA has given the team an incredible amount of cap flexibility. He's shown that he'll use some of that flexibility to extend promising up and comers. He also showed last year that he may take a few opportunistic shots in FA. This year he showed that he might pass on FA altogether if he can't land the right value.

So far these moves make sense to me. But it's time to show some real progress and win the division.

[RashanGary]

So far these moves make sense to me. But it's time to show some real progress and win the division.

I agree. I'm not going to jump off a cliff if it's not this year but shit or get off the pot time is approaching.

[wist43]

I agree that the lower round draft choices need to develop into starters for this team to have any shot at respectability in the next few years.

After Favre leaves, even if Rodgers ultimately proves he can be an average QB in the league (the absolute highest ceiling I can conceive for him), they're going to flounder around for at least a couple of years.

Adding to the impending Rodgers experiment will be the decline in play, or departure of aging veterans Clifton (Barbre), Harris (Blackmon), Woodson (????), Tausher (Moll), and Driver (????). Then there is the log jam at a position of strength, DT (Pickett and Williams). You would think that one of those guys will be gone after either this year or next.

Moll seems like he'll be ok... needs to bulk up, but he seems to have the tools to eventually step in for Taush. We know nothing about Barbre, and Blackmon has skills, but can he stay healthy??? There's currently no one on the roster waiting to take over for Driver and Woodson.

From where we are now, i.e. the holes that already exist on the roster, and the expected holes created by the departure of the vets listed above... even with the emergence of some of the lower round guys - when does TT get caught up???

Do we continue to draft 46 guys and bottom feed in FA every year??? So let's say we find some guys who can adequately fill all those holes - or even 1/2 of the holes... where are the playmakers necessary to winning championships going to come from??? The 5th/6th/7th rounds???

[Zool]

You're saying this like we've traded out of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd each of the past 3 years.

2005 there was 1 first, 2 seconds, 0 3rds.
2006 there was 1 first, 2 seconds, 2 3rds.
2007 there was 1 first, 1 second, 2 3rds.

Seems to me that we've gotten more picks in the first 3 rounds than each team is alloted over the past 3 seasons. Do you really believe that trading down 10 spots in the 5th round to pick up an additional 6th rounder is sacrificing a talent level?

So far we've picked exactly at our assigned spot in the first round which is where the blue chippers are supposed to come from right?

[Partial]

You're saying this like we've traded out of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd each of the past 3 years.

2005 there was 1 first, 2 seconds, 0 3rds.
2006 there was 1 first, 2 seconds, 2 3rds.
2007 there was 1 first, 1 second, 2 3rds.

Seems to me that we've gotten more picks in the first 3 rounds than each team is alloted over the past 3 seasons. Do you really believe that trading down 10 spots in the 5th round to pick up an additional 6th rounder is sacrificing a talent level?

So far we've picked exactly at our assigned spot in the first round which is where the blue chippers are supposed to come from right?

No, its not. That is why TT has a good strategy because it gives you another player in camp that may turn into something. More often than not I am sure they still get the guy they want even when trading down 10 picks. It's a crapshoot after the first day. With two shots instead of one, the odds improve.

[Zool]

That was my point.

[Partial]

That was my point.

Right

[Fritz]

Thesse last few posts make a good point, and earlier CalCheez made another, and I'd like to expand on that point. Bretsky's original assumption is that low-round draft picks automatically become the bottom third of your roster. While that is probably the most likely fate of most of those post-fourth round picks, it is also true that there can be impact guys found late. Not too often, but often enough that it's worth having, say, five picks in rounds five to seven rather than three. You might, if your scouts are good and you're a bit lucky, find a Driver, a Colston, a Rivera, a Levens, a Bennett, or a Tauscher.

And if you're only trading down from the mid-fourth to the late fourth to get an extra pick in the fifth or sixth, what does it cost you? If you're trading down then you're clearly not enamoured with what's sitting in front of you. Thompson trades down, yes, but he also stays put - see Rodgers, Harrell, and Hawk.

[wist43]

Trading down in the 1st though, will net you 2nd's and 3rd's... still very high quality players. Trading down in the 4th nets you bodies...

No matter how you slice it, they're going to bring 80 some bodies to camp; so, what you're looking at is 25-30 guys who fill out the training camp roster, with the hope that 1 or 2 of them is a player.

Most of those 5th, 6th, and 7th rounders are borderline FA's anyway - personally, I value 4th round picks pretty highly.

[wist43]

2005 draft: 5th Coston, 5th Hawkins, 6th Montgomery, 6th Bragg, 7th Campbell, 7th Whittiker.

Lot of junk there... none of those guys can play. Coston and Monte are still with the team, but I don't hold out much hope for them.

2006 draft: 5th Ingle Martin, 5th Tony Moll, 6th Jonny Jolly, 6th Tyron Culver, 7th Dave Tollefson.

Two players, two potential players, one junk.

[Bretsky]

Thesse last few posts make a good point, and earlier CalCheez made another, and I'd like to expand on that point. Bretsky's original assumption is that low-round draft picks automatically become the bottom third of your roster. While that is probably the most likely fate of most of those post-fourth round picks, it is also true that there can be impact guys found late. Not too often, but often enough that it's worth having, say, five picks in rounds five to seven rather than three. You might, if your scouts are good and you're a bit lucky, find a Driver, a Colston, a Rivera, a Levens, a Bennett, or a Tauscher.

And if you're only trading down from the mid-fourth to the late fourth to get an extra pick in the fifth or sixth, what does it cost you? If you're trading down then you're clearly not enamoured with what's sitting in front of you. Thompson trades down, yes, but he also stays put - see Rodgers, Harrell, and Hawk.


Has Ted found any late round gems ?? Sherman found Kampman. Wolf found several. Should be interesting to see.

[esoxx]

Thesse last few posts make a good point, and earlier CalCheez made another, and I'd like to expand on that point. Bretsky's original assumption is that low-round draft picks automatically become the bottom third of your roster. While that is probably the most likely fate of most of those post-fourth round picks, it is also true that there can be impact guys found late. Not too often, but often enough that it's worth having, say, five picks in rounds five to seven rather than three. You might, if your scouts are good and you're a bit lucky, find a Driver, a Colston, a Rivera, a Levens, a Bennett, or a Tauscher.

And if you're only trading down from the mid-fourth to the late fourth to get an extra pick in the fifth or sixth, what does it cost you? If you're trading down then you're clearly not enamoured with what's sitting in front of you. Thompson trades down, yes, but he also stays put - see Rodgers, Harrell, and Hawk.


Has Ted found any late round gems ?? Sherman found Kampman. Wolf found several. Should be interesting to see.

Sherman also found two pretty good starters in Wells & Williams very late in the draft.

[Bretsky]

Thesse last few posts make a good point, and earlier CalCheez made another, and I'd like to expand on that point. Bretsky's original assumption is that low-round draft picks automatically become the bottom third of your roster. While that is probably the most likely fate of most of those post-fourth round picks, it is also true that there can be impact guys found late. Not too often, but often enough that it's worth having, say, five picks in rounds five to seven rather than three. You might, if your scouts are good and you're a bit lucky, find a Driver, a Colston, a Rivera, a Levens, a Bennett, or a Tauscher.

And if you're only trading down from the mid-fourth to the late fourth to get an extra pick in the fifth or sixth, what does it cost you? If you're trading down then you're clearly not enamoured with what's sitting in front of you. Thompson trades down, yes, but he also stays put - see Rodgers, Harrell, and Hawk.


Has Ted found any late round gems ?? Sherman found Kampman. Wolf found several. Should be interesting to see.

Sherman also found two pretty good starters in Wells & Williams very late in the draft.

I've noted several times that his selections were not as terrible as many people note.

But his trade ups were his big mistake. Giving up eight draft picks to trade up for four players who turned out to be nothing was terrible.

[Partial]

Late round players take years to develop. It's impossible to know this early.

[retailguy]

Late round players take years to develop. It's impossible to know this early.

Marques Colston took FOREVER to get on the field.

[wist43]

Thesse last few posts make a good point, and earlier CalCheez made another, and I'd like to expand on that point. Bretsky's original assumption is that low-round draft picks automatically become the bottom third of your roster. While that is probably the most likely fate of most of those post-fourth round picks, it is also true that there can be impact guys found late. Not too often, but often enough that it's worth having, say, five picks in rounds five to seven rather than three. You might, if your scouts are good and you're a bit lucky, find a Driver, a Colston, a Rivera, a Levens, a Bennett, or a Tauscher.

And if you're only trading down from the mid-fourth to the late fourth to get an extra pick in the fifth or sixth, what does it cost you? If you're trading down then you're clearly not enamoured with what's sitting in front of you. Thompson trades down, yes, but he also stays put - see Rodgers, Harrell, and Hawk.


Has Ted found any late round gems ?? Sherman found Kampman. Wolf found several. Should be interesting to see.

Moll and Jolly are keepers. Culver has potential. Jury is out on Martin. Everything else is junk.

Late round picks from 2005 are all hamburger flippers.

[CaliforniaCheez]

Late round players take years to develop. It's impossible to know this early.

Marques Colston took FOREVER to get on the field. Tauscher took a few games also.

I think what you hope to find with second day picks are the Pro Bowlers like Kampmann and Driver who keep getting better with experience.
They begin as depth and work their way up.

Also draft picks are usually better players than the undrafted free agent rookie.

Out of all the hundreds of guys that play college football only 10-15 at each position get drafted each year. They are the "cream of the crop"

A guy like Bishop led the PAC 10 in tackles and gets drafted in the 6th round? Drafted players are good players.

KGB was cut and on the practice squad available to all before he led the league in sacks. The same with Hasselback who has started several years in Seattle. Whitticker is the #3 OG in Washington and may earn a starting spot in training camp.

Don't write off the youth Thompson has acquired. This year they will be getting that valuable experience. Judgement of Thompson's picks is coming but it is too soon for many.

[swede]

Thesse last few posts make a good point, and earlier CalCheez made another, and I'd like to expand on that point. Bretsky's original assumption is that low-round draft picks automatically become the bottom third of your roster. While that is probably the most likely fate of most of those post-fourth round picks, it is also true that there can be impact guys found late. Not too often, but often enough that it's worth having, say, five picks in rounds five to seven rather than three. You might, if your scouts are good and you're a bit lucky, find a Driver, a Colston, a Rivera, a Levens, a Bennett, or a Tauscher.

And if you're only trading down from the mid-fourth to the late fourth to get an extra pick in the fifth or sixth, what does it cost you? If you're trading down then you're clearly not enamoured with what's sitting in front of you. Thompson trades down, yes, but he also stays put - see Rodgers, Harrell, and Hawk.


Has Ted found any late round gems ?? Sherman found Kampman. Wolf found several. Should be interesting to see.

Sherman also found two pretty good starters in Wells & Williams very late in the draft.

Late in the draft is probably when Sherm started to lose interest and let his scouts make the picks.