CRISTL- "THOMPSON THINKING SMALL"

[Bretsky]

Thompson seems to be thinking small
Posted: May 10, 2006


Green Bay - With Brett Favre nearing the twilight of his career, the Green Bay Packers under Mike Sherman couldn't resist the temptation to go for broke and try to land that one more star who might help them win another Super Bowl.

And understandably so.

That's why some of the criticism of Sherman as general manager is misplaced. The trades to move up in the draft that depleted the overall number of picks, the free agent signing of Joe Johnson, etc., were done in quest of the so-called final piece to the puzzle.

This off-season, even with the Packers coming off a 4-12 record, there again was a buzz that if they could just somehow swing a trade to get Reggie Bush or even take tight end Vernon Davis in the draft, it might be enough to put them back in the playoff hunt and, in turn, at least give them an outside shot at a bigger prize.

But what seemed apparent at the Packers' recent minicamp is that general manager Ted Thompson has a different plan in mind. Even if he refuses to call it rebuilding, he's trying to fill in the pieces from the ground up, not the other way around.

There were 12 draft picks there and not one of them looked out of place, although defensive tackle Johnny Jolly didn't participate due to an injury. There were some non-drafted free agents who might have a chance. There was youth to be found in the offensive and defensive lines. There seemed to be more speed on defense.

On the whole, there appeared to be more good, young players on the field than there had been in recent years.

There's no right or wrong way to build a championship team. Circumstances might dictate the course as much as philosophy.

The reigning champion Pittsburgh Steelers were an example of a team built from the ground up. The foundation for winning a Super Bowl essentially has been there since early in Bill Cowher's reign, which dates to 1992. But it wasn't until the past three years that they topped it all off with safety Troy Polamalu, the key to their defense, and quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, the key to their offense.

On the other hand, the Indianapolis Colts, who have been in the Super Bowl hunt four consecutive years, built the penthouse first. They started with Marvin Harrison, Peyton Manning and Edgerrin James over the course of three drafts in four years in the late 1990s and have been filling in around them ever since, or at least until James departed in free agency some two months ago.

One could argue that former general manager Ron Wolf built the 1996 Packers from the top down. He acquired his cornerstones, Brett Favre and Reggie White, early on and built off them.

Only time will tell if Thompson will be successful. Again, it's understandable why his agenda differs from Sherman's. By playing the all or nothing game, Sherman was largely at fault for the deterioration of his roster's infrastructure and someone had to fill the cracks.

Sherman also was fighting steep odds. By drafting late in all three of his years as GM, he was banking mostly on pure luck to find the instant stars he needed to win it all.

But Thompson's approach isn't foolproof either.

The game is still all about playmakers. And, in the short-term, even if the Packers appear to have added several promising young players and already have improved their depth, it's hard to see at this point how they can be a whole lot better than last season.

Who's going to score their touchdowns? Where are the big plays going to come from?

Their only healthy and proven running back in camp was Samkon Gado. He looked every bit as explosive as he did late last season, but he's still a raw talent.

The Packers' doctors are optimistic about Ahman Green making a successful comeback, but he's coming off an injury that has been career-ending for others and he's 29, old for a running back. Najeh Davenport remains an intriguing candidate, but he hasn't stayed healthy for four years.

By no means did the Packers look bankrupt of talent at wide receiver in this camp. As a group, it looked deeper than the casts of recent years. Clearly, the receivers looked better on the hoof than the group that finished last season, simply because they weren't all a bunch of gnats.

Donald Driver looked as good as ever and just about every team in the league would be happy to have him as a starter. But he's not Javon Walker. He's not an ideal No. 1.

Robert Ferguson looked healthier and faster than he did at any time last season, but he has been an underachiever for five years and his durability also remains suspect. Rod Gardner showed a willingness to go inside to catch slants and held onto the ball, albeit in non-contact drills, but he didn't cut it last year with Carolina, which desperately needed a big receiver opposite Steve Smith. Marc Boerigter is another big target who showed good hands and might be sneaky-fast, but he couldn't get playing time last year with Kansas City, another team short on receivers.

Greg Jennings, the Packers' second-round draft pick, looked as good as any rookie in camp, but wide receiver is a position where it's becoming increasingly rare for rookies to make an impact.

Even Favre is no longer a sure thing. At some point, he's going to lose it and it's something that can happen overnight.

For now, Favre is the least of the Packers' worries. But it's hard to envision him at age 36 moving the chains the way he did at 26, if indeed that's coach Mike McCarthy's plan: To revert to the style of West Coast offense that Mike Holmgren brought to Green Bay in the early 1990s.

In a nutshell, Thompson's apparent plan might be perfect for the moment. Maybe Sherman was chasing fool's gold and it was time to revert to a more realistic approach.

But it also might require more patience on the part of fans.

[Noodle]

Pretty even-handed article, though Cliffy should go out on a limb and say whether he thinks the TT approach will work. I saw in a chat that Christl thought the receivers were fine, but none of them were close to Walker's class. In my mind, that's a problem, though perhaps not a crushing one under the less vertically dependnent system we're running now.

I like it mostly because it gives some context to Sherman's moves. Yeah, he had a few Fergy's where he should have gone Chambers, but by in large his drafts were efforts to get specific guys he thought would fill a need. It's not like the guy tried to run the team in to the ground.

Sherm was snake bit and did not have the God-given talent to overcome his bad luck. Probably worse, he didn't cut his mistakes quicker, which really left a stink around the place of underachievement. I have no doubt that TT will cut any goldbrickers without hesitation. And he'll have millions of dollars of cap room lying around to abosrb the hit. (Maybe that's his master plan?).

[Bossman641]

I like how his blueprint for success is the Indianapolis Colts, a team that for the most part has just tried to outscore teams and has struggled when unable to turn games into a track meet.

I just don't feel you can win a championship like that. For years it has seemed like the Packer organization's focus has been on the offense side of the ball. Sherman tried to fill in holes but it just didn't work. I, for one, am glad to see the focus swing back to defense.

And let's be honest, even with Bush or Davis we would be no real threat to compete for the Lombardi trophy. I'm patient enough to build up depth for a year or two before making serious continuous runs at the title.

[Badgepack]

I like TT's aproach, a tough defense always takes the pressure off the offense. Favre needs to not feel he has to win every game on his own. Building from the ground up, with "smart" players that fit your system seems the way to go.

[Joemailman]

I think the headline of the article is deceiving. Nowhere does Christl say Thompson is thinking small, but rather, it says he is taking a different approach. He really has no choice. He doesn't have the luxury of a still relatively young Brett Favre, as Sherman did. Nor has there been any free agent out there who would have the impact that Wolf's signing of Reggie White had.

It took Ron Wolf 5 years to get his team to the Super Bowl. Sherman never came close. Thompson deserves a little more time before people start judging whether his way of getting there works. Actually, I think the guy Thompson is trying to emulate isn't Wolf or Sherman. It's Belichick. Belichick built through the draft, while occasionally takinga shot at a big free agent (Rodney Harrison, he also traded for Corey Dillon). Is there anyone better for Thompson to try to emulate?

[pbmax]

That's why some of the criticism of Sherman as general manager is misplaced. The trades to move up in the draft that depleted the overall number of picks, the free agent signing of Joe Johnson, etc., were done in quest of the so-called final piece to the puzzle.

Only time will tell if Thompson will be successful. Again, it's understandable why his agenda differs from Sherman's. By playing the all or nothing game, Sherman was largely at fault for the deterioration of his roster's infrastructure and someone had to fill the cracks.

Sherman also was fighting steep odds. By drafting late in all three of his years as GM, he was banking mostly on pure luck to find the instant stars he needed to win it all.

That's a good summation of Mike Sherman's tenure as GM. It doesn't cover his accomplishments, but it captures the essence of the risk he was running and the reason the team has very few young stars and has no depth.

And I can see the direction Thompson is headed and I like it. He clearly overestimated his ability to find replacements at Guard and Safety in year one, but he did find talent in the draft.

The question that remains is FA, how will he retain the stars that develops? And will his track record improve with signed FAs? Both Woodson and Pickett have potential downsides and even if they don't kill the cap, the downside is pretty steep on the field.

Continually flooding the bottom of the roster with new and young (and cheap) developing talent is clearly the best route. Depth makes all decisions easier, and helps the cap flexibility. If his track record gets better at FA to sign and FAs to keep, this just might work out.

[The Leaper]

The problem with Sherman's approach wasn't that he traded up...but when. It is one thing to trade up in the first round to go for a specific guy that you feel is a sure thing. Sherman did that with Walker and was successful. In the first 25 rookie prospects, it is easier to target a guy you like because most of these guys have played against elite competition and have 2 or 3 years worth of game film at the college level.

Sherman's problem was that he continued the trading up approach into the later rounds...where I think moving up becomes a huge mistake. As the draft continues into the 3rd through 7th rounds, it becomes increasingly difficult to spot a "can't miss" prospect that you would feel is worthy giving up picks for. IMO, it is a poor choice to EVER trade up past the first 50 picks...be patient and stand pat and if someone falls to you that you like, dance like a madman. Otherwise, find someone else to take or trade DOWN.

Sherman traded up several times outside the first 50 picks...the most notorious move being the Sander debacle, but Sherman also traded up to get Kenny Peterson and James Lee. None of those worked out...and I would think that most teams that move up to get someone after round 2 probably have a high rate of failure in terms of getting adaquate return on their investment. If someone has time to do a little more research on that, go for it.

[mraynrand]

"It took Ron Wolf 5 years to get his team to the Super Bowl. Sherman never came close. "

---

Sherman was one play away from the NFC championship game in 2003 and was 8-1 and cruising before all the injurines in 2002. I actually think he was reasonably close, considering the circumstances.

Still, the only measure of a GMs success is victories and championships. I agree that Sherman should have used more picks in the later rounds, but Cristl has made the point that that strategy didn't work for a lot of other teams trying to get defensive line help.

Because the Packers were so successful, they drafted very late in the first round all three years Sherman was GM. That's like not having a first round draft pick. Still, name a better #29 pick in the last 15 years than Barnett. How many other teams got a pro bowl WR with the #20 pick? How many other GMs have been fired after going 32-16? How many people thought that Terry Glenn was the best FA receiver available following the 2001 season and how many thought Joe Johnson was the best FA DE available?

It's pretty easy to focus on all the crappy moves Sherman made (and he made plenty), but when you look at what he was trying to do (specifically, win before Favre's skills diminished), he at least gave it a pretty good effort. I prefer the TT method of using the draft to build depth and hopefully hit on a later round pro bowl talent, but the odds just aren't that good. This year TT had what Sherman never had - a top 5 pick and top picks in every round. Wist is right that TT probably could have signed Walker long term, so by trading him, he got all the benefits of an additional high #2 pick. If the Packers are to be successful under TT, this years' draft has to turn out very well, as they might not (hopefully) get such a bounty of high draft picks again.

[Partial]

"It took Ron Wolf 5 years to get his team to the Super Bowl. Sherman never came close. "

---

Sherman was one play away from the NFC championship game in 2003 and was 8-1 and cruising before all the injurines in 2002. I actually think he was reasonably close, considering the circumstances.

Still, the only measure of a GMs success is victories and championships. I agree that Sherman should have used more picks in the later rounds, but Cristl has made the point that that strategy didn't work for a lot of other teams trying to get defensive line help.

Because the Packers were so successful, they drafted very late in the first round all three years Sherman was GM. That's like not having a first round draft pick. Still, name a better #29 pick in the last 15 years than Barnett. How many other teams got a pro bowl WR with the #20 pick? How many other GMs have been fired after going 32-16? How many people thought that Terry Glenn was the best FA receiver available following the 2001 season and how many thought Joe Johnson was the best FA DE available?

It's pretty easy to focus on all the crappy moves Sherman made (and he made plenty), but when you look at what he was trying to do (specifically, win before Favre's skills diminished), he at least gave it a pretty good effort. I prefer the TT method of using the draft to build depth and hopefully hit on a later round pro bowl talent, but the odds just aren't that good. This year TT had what Sherman never had - a top 5 pick and top picks in every round. Wist is right that TT probably could have signed Walker long term, so by trading him, he got all the benefits of an additional high #2 pick. If the Packers are to be successful under TT, this years' draft has to turn out very well, as they might not (hopefully) get such a bounty of high draft picks again.

It was the divisional game in 2003, not the championship.

No one thought T-Glenn and JJ were the best free agents at their positions that year. Wasn't Ray Lewis picked 29th? i'll take him over barnett.

Steve Smith is a pro-bowler and he drafted 3rd roud. Bolden was a second rounder. Receivers are difficult to judge. Many later rounders become pro-bowlers. Gates wasn't even drafted.

[mraynrand]

"It was the divisional game in 2003, not the championship."

That's exactly what I wrote - they were one play away from the NFC championship game. From what a lot of fans seem to think, if they had beaten Philly they were a shoo-in to beat Carolina. I didn't agree, but the Final four is pretty damn good in the NFL and they almost made it.

"No one thought T-Glenn and JJ were the best free agents at their positions that year."

Not one single person? Which FA wideouts did you think were better?


"Wasn't Ray Lewis picked 29th? i'll take him over barnett."

No, the 26th pick. I'd take him too, as long as he was disarmed and you also gave me a couple of very good DTs to go along.

"Steve Smith is a pro-bowler and he drafted 3rd roud. Bolden was a second rounder. Receivers are difficult to judge. Many later rounders become pro-bowlers. Gates wasn't even drafted."

Nice cherry picking. Yes and Dorsey Levens and Terrel Davis were picked in the 5th. Yes you get pro bowlers in late rounds but the frequency is extremely low compared to the top 5 picks.

I look at fans like you and I notice one very specific tendency - that is to only look at specifics from other teams that worked out very well (i.e. cherry picking). I rarely see fans like you try to place a guy based on how he compared with good and bad coaches. For example, Sherman looks bad compared to Belichick, but how does he look when you compare him with (for example) Butch Davis?

[Partial]

I don't even think its so much shermans fault versus a good team being good for too long.

I think they needed to clean house and rebuild. Salary cap only lets you stay good for so long.

[cosimoto]

One could argue that former general manager Ron Wolf built the 1996 Packers from the top down. He acquired his cornerstones, Brett Favre and Reggie White, early on and built off them.

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g183/cosimoto/SamuraiGB7.jpg When Wolf acquired Reggie, Reggie was a known quantity. Everyone in the league knew he was a terrific player. So from day 1 Reggie was a cornerstone for what became a championship caliber team. Brett was acquired by Wolf after having spent his rookie year in Atlanta having thrown 4 passes---two incomplete and two interceptions. Brett, in time, became the cornerstone of the offense. I'm not sure how many people around the league viewed Brett as a future HOF quarterback in those first few years. Certainly the Falcons did not view him that way. So I can buy into the statement "building from the top down" for the defensive side of the equation, but not so much for the offensive side.

[mraynrand]

I don't even think its so much shermans fault versus a good team being good for too long.

I think they needed to clean house and rebuild. Salary cap only lets you stay good for so long.

I agree. I think Sherman was for the most part selling out the future to "win now." I was curious to see whether he would have continued the same strategy after Favre retired. I was hoping he would 1) Replace Hatley with someone as good or better and 2) Re-evaluate his draft strategy. Somehow, I don't think he'll ever get another shot as GM. Hell, when Marv Levy picks Dick Jauron over Shermy as head coach, it makes you scratch your head and wonder if the guy will even get to be a head coach in the NFL again.

[b bulldog]

When trading up in the draft, you lose valuable picks which can be used for developmental players that can become stars and roster depth.

[RashanGary]

I read a really in depth research on that and other draft issues bulldog...I and months of well conducted research agree with you.

[b bulldog]

This is the reason why Spec teams was so lousey.

[Noodle]

Bulldog -- your comment on special teams hit on something I've been thinking; that is, we will be vastly improved in our coverage units (though we will suck at punting and FG kicking).

Take Hodge, for example. Even if he doesn't crack the starting lineup, you gotta believe this kid is going to be a holy terror on coverage units.

I don't think Sherman's teams had the depth of young studs looking to make a name for themselves. Instead, we had guys like Fergy playing coverage who didn't really want to be out there.


On the whole, I agree with Mr. Ayn Rand's analysis of the Shermy years. And don't tell me folks thought Joe Johnson was a bad move -- he was without question the best FA DL at that time. So this notion that Shermy ignored D is silly. He didn't ignore D, he just didn't have any luck/skill at picking D guys (except for Barnett).

[ND72]

No one thought T-Glenn and JJ were the best free agents at their positions that year. Wasn't Ray Lewis picked 29th? i'll take him over barnett.


Ray Lewis was actually picked in the top 20...i think like 18 or 19...cause i remember Ron Wolfe saying he'd pass on Ray Lewis, we picked right after Lewis was taken. I believe we took Jon Michaels, could be wrong, but i know we picked right after Ray Lewis was taken.

This is actually one of the first, and only, articles I've read of this guys, and actually thought his brain was working when he wrote it. Thompson had NO choice but to go in this direction, and for months when people were complaining about him not signing big FA, i sat back and said GOOD. I do like the Woodson signing don't get me wrong, but there was no reason to break the bank in basically Thompson's first full offseason of work. I'm passing judgement on last year's offseason cause I think he came in and wanted to put his footprint on the team, and he really shouldnt' have just yet. More imporantly, I think he knows that. I think He had maybe one of the best drafts ever in packer history a couple weeks ago, and I think he's bringing in the right people free agent wise.

I've also said for months that sherman's downfall was he was signing and drafting for the NOW, not the tomorrow. Thompson is signing drafting for the tomorrow, with hopes of NOW.

[KYPack]

No one thought T-Glenn and JJ were the best free agents at their positions that year. Wasn't Ray Lewis picked 29th? i'll take him over barnett.


Ray Lewis was actually picked in the top 20...i think like 18 or 19...cause i remember Ron Wolfe saying he'd pass on Ray Lewis, we picked right after Lewis was taken. I believe we took Jon Michaels, could be wrong, but i know we picked right after Ray Lewis was taken.


Well, ya got some of this right.

I'll give you props for remembering John Michels.

Ray Lewis was NOT a top 20.
He went 26 to Baltimore.
The next pick? John Michels to the Pack with the 27th pick of the draft.

Baltimore had two #1 picks that year ('96)
With the 4th pick in the draft, They picked Jonathon Ogden.

Not bad, two perennial All-Pro's for the first two picks. Ozzie Newsome is one of the top 3 GM's in the NFL

Wolf's statement is most likely bullshit, I think he'd have taken Lewis if he was available, but who knows?

[ND72]

AH...yeah i was just guessing, i didn't take time to go check. All i remember from that year was RAY LEWIS RAY LEWIS RAY LEWIS....and then baltimore took him, and we took Michaels. what a downer that was. I remember after teh draft, and this is after the fact, and theyhad taken michaels and all that, but the quesiton was if ray lewis had been there at the packers pick, would they have concidered him, and Wolfe answered, "no"......kick me in the groin.

[Noodle]

Yeah, Lewis went 26, but getting a talent like that is rare -- sort of like Marino slipping down to No. 27. It happens, but it's freakish.

I thought this article was kind of fun:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5549072

It selects the best player ever picked at their number. For example, Lewis was picked as the best ever No. 26 selection.

Guess who is the best ever No. 29 -- our own Nick Barnett.

[ND72]

good link Noodle. Notice how many Packers are listed as the All Time Worst...and by the way, Craig Newsome???? If he hadnt' gotten injured, he was pretty solid...then of course he got busted in La Crosse while coaching their In-Door team for possesion of Cocaine.

[KYPack]

Yeah, Lewis went 26, but getting a talent like that is rare -- sort of like Marino slipping down to No. 27. It happens, but it's freakish.

I thought this article was kind of fun:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5549072

It selects the best player ever picked at their number. For example, Lewis was picked as the best ever No. 26 selection.

Guess who is the best ever No. 29 -- our own Nick Barnett.

Great post, Noodle.

There's a lot of GB/Wis connections in that list.

There's one interesting fact in the flop list, there's a father/son flop with a Packer connection:

Stan Thomas, OT Texas
taken by Chicago Bears, 1991
Ditka used this guy as a bad example of the Bears front office ineptitude.

Stan's son is Robert, a 1st round flop for the St Louie Rams & eventual Packer (now a Raider).

They are the only Father - Son 1st rd flops that I know of.

I don't think the Craig Newsome flop is fair. He was on his way to multiple Pro Bowls when he was hurt, that can happen to anybody. He even came back to play after he was hurt, but obviously, he couldn't play at a high level anymore.

[Noodle]

I agree about Newsome, and the writer admitted that he was pretty good. But I remember a lot of Packer fans not liking Newsome, and I think the knock on him was that he wasn't a great run support tackler.

I never cared too much about whether my DBs can throttle an RB -- what I want is for them to shut down receivers and to do whatever is necessary (drag, trip, pull hair, whatever) to prevent yards after catch. Newsome could cover, and I liked him.

[Guiness]

Wow - four wrost picks, vs one best pick. Maybe we're better off trading out of the first round altogether on a more regular basis.

[mraynrand]

"I don't think the Craig Newsome flop is fair. He was on his way to multiple Pro Bowls when he was hurt, that can happen to anybody. He even came back to play after he was hurt, but obviously, he couldn't play at a high level anymore."

Loved Newsome. a bit slow, but the guy could play. by the end of 1996, he was playing press coverage as well as just about anyone. And he was absolutely punishing receivers. hard hitter. Blew out his ACL and came back. he didn't have speed to lose and he lost it. but you gotta admire how he gutted out the 1998 season. Coming back from his ACL, he also suffered this horrible tear in the skin across his knee - about 8 inches long. The tear would sometimes reopen during games -he's restitch it and get back in there. Damn, that's old school toughness!

[pbmax]

All i remember from that year was RAY LEWIS RAY LEWIS RAY LEWIS....and then baltimore took him, and we took Michaels. what a downer that was. I remember after teh draft, and this is after the fact, and theyhad taken michaels and all that, but the quesiton was if ray lewis had been there at the packers pick, would they have concidered him, and Wolfe answered, "no"......kick me in the groin.
I think T2 has said recently that if Lewis had been there, that they would have selected him. Wolf might have just been defending his pick at the time, or memories could be confused after a few years. I don't know if Wolf has ever copped to that disappointment though.

I completely agree with the posts that Sherman's approach cost us depth and may have specifically affected areas like special teams. I understand why he did it, but with the window closing and talent dwindling, he had a small margin for error. This is where I think Favre's public posturing on retirement had an effect. It put pressure on the front office to think short term.

Between the good money after bad we spent on our own FAs that we had to resign because there was no depth, Sherman had walls closing in on hm from 3 sides.

[ND72]

absolutely pbmax, good post

[The Leaper]

Taking a look at the best of the players selected at #24...it makes sense why Thompson took a flier on Aaron Rodgers last year.

[retailguy]

Wolf's statement is most likely bullshit, I think he'd have taken Lewis if he was available, but who knows?

I remember reading somewhere JSO article perhaps? that the packers were on the telephone with Ray Lewis when Baltimore picked him telling him that they were going to take him. I think, recently, in the last few years that Ray said the same thing.

I can't post a link to verify, but for what it is worth?.... :wink:

[KYPack]

Ron Wolf was a spin master.

He always put a good face on his decisions and made the fans feel like we got the best value for our picks, trades, etc.

Michels was a first round reach, I think Wolf would have snapped up RayLu and then got the best LT he could've gotten in later rounds.

[mraynrand]

But the real question is what would the fans have said had Wolf traded his number 2 pick and the 27th pick to move to 25 to get Lewis. Blowing an extra pick (and a second rounder at that!) to move up to get a pro bowler instead of Michaels and Mayes (edit - Mayes was the previous year - this was the Sharper pick if I remember correctly). Who would dare such a thing and how would the fans react?

[KYPack]

But the real question is what would the fans have said had Wolf traded his number 2 pick and the 27th pick to move to 25 to get Lewis. Blowing an extra pick (and a second rounder at that!) to move up to get a pro bowler instead of Michaels and Mayes (edit - Mayes was the previous year - this was the Sharper pick if I remember correctly). Who would dare such a thing and how would the fans react?

No, you were right the first time. It was Derrick Mayes in the 2nd round. man, I always thought that guy was gonna explode, but he never put it together. All that talent, but he still flopped.