Young Team Conundrum

[pbmax]

I have been a supporter of TT's approach to building a team since he arrived. I support spending cash now to save cap later (this means you have flexibility to both sign additional players AND cut anyone who no longer is performing). I like that money is spent on youth that will continue to improve. I like that the GM and Coach are in charge of this operation, not the CEO, Owner, President or Veteran QB. I support treating draft picks like gold bullion. This approach also lends itself to good Special Teams play as you can have younger, more athletic components on these teams and need fewer roster space eating special team's demons. The only aspect I am not in favor of is the old Wolf adage, "Sign you own", which in the Wolf and Sherman eras meant "Sign your own mediocrity to inflated deals and be unable to cut them". (See Na'il Diggs, KGB, Darren Sharper)

But Thompson avoids even the last problem by following the first principle listed (cash over cap) so that even if you have overpaid or overvalued someone who might need to be replaced, you can do so with no long term cap consequences.

I liked this approach because very similar approaches helped the Eagles, Patriots and Colts to maintain very good teams over long periods of time. Now after the third Super Bowl, I believe, the Patriots started to replace parts with increasingly expensive offseason additions (yes, I know that the Patriots Belicheck era started with many mid to low priced FAs but that is entirely different in my mind than Welker, Thomas and Stallworth). But by and large, these teams succeeded where Jerry Jones, Daniel Snyder and Mike Sherman failed (the GM Mike Sherman, not the coach).

But that leaves a team in a quandary if you underperform. How do you measure these guys? If there are precious few veteran performers at positions (like safety, LB, D Line, interior OL, TE and RB) how do you separate youth from inability? How does Thompson know what to look for this offseason?

I believe the reason our D line has been relegated to awful is that we overvalued the talent on hand. We knew going into the season that they had shown they could get run on. And we knew from last year that KGB and a healthy Williams/Jolly were necessary to generate a pass rush. Once both the smaller tackles got winded/banged up the interior pass rush slowed. Then when KGB got hurt, it disappeared altogether.

So who is evaluating this mess? Who missed on the D Line? Was it the coaches who thought the younger players would be farther along? Or did the scouts think 13-3 meant no problems? A veteran team that shows signs of weakness is less of a problem, you know you need help, as either age or decline will catch everyone. They can have a casting call for young players in the offseason and not worry about the vets reps. What does a team that is young everywhere do? More youth?

While I would prefer that answer, my fear is that more youth will present us with the same difficulty in gauging its performance that bedeviled our evaluation of our D Line last year. At this point I would like to change D coordinator's to get some different eyeballs on the problem, regardless of scheme change.

[packers04]

we need more talent from the draft that is ready to start in the NFL first day.
kinda like the 06 draft with jennings, colledge, spitz, hawk, jolly, etc.

i think this past year since we looked to be a really good, deep team, they drafted more on potential than anything... look at guys like
Lee, Finley, Thompson etc. we need to get guys that look to be starters or decent back ups on day one.

[pbmax]

we need more talent from the draft that is ready to start in the NFL first day.
kinda like the 06 draft with jennings, colledge, spitz, hawk, jolly, etc.

i think this past year since we looked to be a really good, deep team, they drafted more on potential than anything... look at guys like
Lee, Finley, Thompson etc. we need to get guys that look to be starters or decent back ups on day one.

I think many would quibble about Spitz and Colledge being ready their first year. I think they have become solid starters in year 3. Jennings is a definite yes, Hawk maybe a step behind. But you might get one a year on average, if you are doing really well.

And that is the problem: if it takes 3 years to evaluate, how can you fill holes when you aren't sure which ones will persist?

[Patler]

I have said time and time again that we should wait to characterize TT as being anti-FA until he has built up the base of the roster. When the team gets close, will he pull the trigger to add missing parts, if they are available as FAs? Adding high priced FAs to a roster that is weak overall may win a game or two, but really is meaningless in the long haul. Adding a high priced FA when you are close can put you over the top.

In spite of what has happened this year, I think the roster is pretty good. Depending on who is available, a FA signing or two could make a very big impact on next year. I hope that will happen.

They are starting a DE who was #4 on their depth chart to begin with, and every one of the DTs has performed below expectations (except maybe Cole from whom little was expected). No doubt that Pickett can play better, he has and hopefully will. No doubt that Harrell was "over valued". They have not gotten nearly what they expected. Jolly is the real question mark, is he what we saw in 2007, or what we are getting in 2008? Will he be here in 2009, or suspended? If good D-line help is available, I hope TT signs some, even if they are a bit overpriced, because even if Kampman, Jenkins, Pickett, Jolly and Harrell meet expectations, mor help is needed.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re: Young Team Conundrum

I liked this approach because very similar approaches helped the Eagles, Patriots and Colts to maintain very good teams over long periods of time.

Good post, and you can add the Steelers to this list.

[sharpe1027]

Re: Young Team Conundrum

So who is evaluating this mess? Who missed on the D Line? Was it the coaches who thought the younger players would be farther along?

Jenkins and, to a lesser extent, Barnett magnified any misses. Keep those two healthy and, IMO, the problems don't look so bad.

[pbmax]

I have said time and time again that we should wait to characterize TT as being anti-FA until he has built up the base of the roster. When the team gets close, will he pull the trigger to add missing parts, if they are available as FAs? Adding high priced FAs to a roster that is weak overall may win a game or two, but really is meaningless in the long haul. Adding a high priced FA when you are close can put you over the top.

In spite of what has happened this year, I think the roster is pretty good. Depending on who is available, a FA signing or two could make a very big impact on next year. I hope that will happen.

They are starting a DE who was #4 on their depth chart to begin with, and every one of the DTs has performed below expectations (except maybe Cole from whom little was expected). No doubt that Pickett can play better, he has and hopefully will. No doubt that Harrell was "over valued". They have not gotten nearly what they expected. Jolly is the real question mark, is he what we saw in 2007, or what we are getting in 2008? Will he be here in 2009, or suspended? If good D-line help is available, I hope TT signs some, even if they are a bit overpriced, because even if Kampman, Jenkins, Pickett, Jolly and Harrell meet expectations, mor help is needed.

I did not mean my evaluation to indicate that I thought TT to be anti-FA. On the contrary, I think his FA signings to date (Woodson, Pickett, Chillar and Walker) point that his philosophy is not just value based, but also depth based.

He clearly had no viable options at run stuffing DT or starting CB when he signed Pickett and Woodson. He spent like you would expect other teams to for both. In Chillar's case, he paid a premium for a guy they might have been content with as a pass down LB, something they did not have on the roster.

But that is also part of the problem with youth. If they guess wrong on the future of Jeremy Thompson, then there maybe another year where its Jenkins and nothing at RDE. Unless Thompson is the real deal. I don't think Montgomery is anything beyond a stopgap.

[pbmax]

Re: Young Team Conundrum

I liked this approach because very similar approaches helped the Eagles, Patriots and Colts to maintain very good teams over long periods of time.

Good post, and you can add the Steelers to this list.

Perhaps, this year and in hindsight, the best example of all. Thanks Harv.

[Fritz]

Of course, going after the high-priced free agents means that a GM has got to make a judgement as to whether his team is close or not.

So we're back to the original conundrum: is this team young and close, or is it just young?

One way to find out - albeit an expensive way - might be to sign a high priced and talented defensive tackle this offseason (assuming there is one available who wants to come to GB). Then, given how the injury situation plays out in 09, the team should have a sense of where they're at. If the injuries stay to a minimum and the team still finishes at 7 - 9 or 8 - 8, then you have an idea that, well, oops. If you get to the playoffs, though, then maybe you were close.

[Patler]

I have said time and time again that we should wait to characterize TT as being anti-FA until he has built up the base of the roster. When the team gets close, will he pull the trigger to add missing parts, if they are available as FAs? Adding high priced FAs to a roster that is weak overall may win a game or two, but really is meaningless in the long haul. Adding a high priced FA when you are close can put you over the top.

In spite of what has happened this year, I think the roster is pretty good. Depending on who is available, a FA signing or two could make a very big impact on next year. I hope that will happen.

They are starting a DE who was #4 on their depth chart to begin with, and every one of the DTs has performed below expectations (except maybe Cole from whom little was expected). No doubt that Pickett can play better, he has and hopefully will. No doubt that Harrell was "over valued". They have not gotten nearly what they expected. Jolly is the real question mark, is he what we saw in 2007, or what we are getting in 2008? Will he be here in 2009, or suspended? If good D-line help is available, I hope TT signs some, even if they are a bit overpriced, because even if Kampman, Jenkins, Pickett, Jolly and Harrell meet expectations, mor help is needed.

I did not mean my evaluation to indicate that I thought TT to be anti-FA. On the contrary, I think his FA signings to date (Woodson, Pickett, Chillar and Walker) point that his philosophy is not just value based, but also depth based.

He clearly had no viable options at run stuffing DT or starting CB when he signed Pickett and Woodson. He spent like you would expect other teams to for both. In Chillar's case, he paid a premium for a guy they might have been content with as a pass down LB, something they did not have on the roster.

But that is also part of the problem with youth. If they guess wrong on the future of Jeremy Thompson, then there maybe another year where its Jenkins and nothing at RDE. Unless Thompson is the real deal. I don't think Montgomery is anything beyond a stopgap.

Sorry, I didn't mean my post to imply you thought TT was anti-FA. I just wanted to emphasize that now is the time we might find out, because now is the time that FA help could be very meaningful. To me it doesn't matter if they are right on Jeremy Thompson or not, or even Harrell. Even if those two pan out as hoped, they still could use more help in the D-line, so there really is no conundrum in that area.

The two areas that the youth/veteran problem may exist are in the defernsive backfield and the offensive line. A lot of young, unproven players in each area showing potential, but not a certainty.

[Patler]

Tramon Williams probably exemplifies your concern. He looked real good in the weeks he replaced Harris. The last two weeks filling in for Woodson he has shown some warts that were not apparent in his earlier stint as a starter.

Which player is he, the one who played in place of Harris, or the one who started the last two weeks?

[prsnfoto]

I think if we remain the youngest team in the league each year they will be mediocre at best. One spot to watch this offseason is CB Al seems to think he will be gone if that is the case and they go with Tramon you will know what TT truly believes about his youth movement which is fine but if that is his position he might want to call BB and offer him like 30 million a year to coach cause you are gonna need the best coach when you don't have the best players.

[pbmax]

I think if we remain the youngest team in the league each year they will be mediocre at best. One spot to watch this offseason is CB Al seems to think he will be gone if that is the case and they go with Tramon you will know what TT truly believes about his youth movement which is fine but if that is his position he might want to call BB and offer him like 30 million a year to coach cause you are gonna need the best coach when you don't have the best players.

As Patler observed, Williams has experienced success and shown flashes that his ability is above ordinary. Like, Collins, he may go up and down until he settles into a starting role, but I can envision success with him. Although I don't see Thompson letting Al go under his current contract.

The D Line prospects, on the other hand, have shown much less to me. Adding to my concern is that Jenkins may have been our best end. Is Kampman worth the next contract he is going to get? His contract now is a steal, but if it doubles, which guy shows up?

[MadtownPacker]

Re: Young Team Conundrum

I liked this approach because very similar approaches helped the Eagles, Patriots and Colts to maintain very good teams over long periods of time.

Good post, and you can add the Steelers to this list.

All those teams mentioned are young in many areas but all have NFL vets for each position to help keep the youngsters in check. I like the idea of keeping the roster fresh but I think TT may want to add some sure-fire talent at DE & OL.

I am also sick of this Packers people crap. If a players is great and might have some personal issues so what. The NFL is a game and like any game you have to take risk. TT's lack of taking risk might be what does him in.

[texaspackerbacker]

we need more talent from the draft that is ready to start in the NFL first day.
kinda like the 06 draft with jennings, colledge, spitz, hawk, jolly, etc.

i think this past year since we looked to be a really good, deep team, they drafted more on potential than anything... look at guys like
Lee, Finley, Thompson etc. we need to get guys that look to be starters or decent back ups on day one.

The last draft was coming off the 13-3 season with the generally acknowledged perception that the Packers had excellent depth all the way around. For Thompson to draft some long shots and projects like Lee, Finley, and Thompson--all of whom still have a decent chance to be good players--was natural.

The reason it now seems like we lack depth, lack quality, or whatever is clearly the rotten luck of injuries, especially concentrated at a few positions on defense.

Thompson is absolutely right to avoid bidding on questionable free agents. that's what the loser teams do. The tough decision this coming off season is not so much prioritizing a lot of weakness as it is AGAIN getting a few quality players. We still have all that perceived quality depth that we had before--maybe even better, as many of those backups have gotten a lot of playing time filling in for injuries.

It's stupid to talk about cleaning house or wholesale cuts. I'm pretty sure Thompson knows that. His policy has been to rebuild on the fly. Last season was a golden example of that; This year not so much. Why? Because INJURIES and other items of bad luck have derailed things.