Vote for who TT should draft. (2009)

[sharpe1027]

So you're saying that TT does, in fact, always address need - his own protestations not withwithstanding

Yes. I don't feel I am going out on a limb in saying that the Packer's Organization looks at team needs when drafting.

- and that he sucks as a talent evaluator???

Maybe. I think that the finished product didn't add up to what it seemed on paper last year, but two years ago it was the same thing in reverse.

He either doesn't care about needs, and that is why our defense sucks, and OL for that matter; or, he always addresses need, but just plain and simply sucks as a talent evaluator... somehow or another 6-10 has to be accounted for... a bump in the road on the way to winning the next 4 superbowls???

To date, he's a sub .500 GM.

Has to be black and white with you, eh? You seem to ignore the substance of the discussion when you seek a strict yes or no answer. My answer has been a consistent maybe.

[red]

Why is Nose Tackle such a glaring need, considering that Ryan Pickett will be playing the exact position he did last year, only he'll be on the field for fewer snaps?

It's an important position, but I think we're a little quick to give up on Pickett, who has long been an anchor on the DL.

I don't think it's a glaring need, and I'm not convinced that Raji is that much better than Jerry or the other NT's in the draft. I think there's a 50-50 chance that TT will trade down because I feel some team desperate for a QB will want to move ahead of San Fran to take Freeman or Sanchez. I voted for Andre Smith because of his potential, long arms, and what he has done on the field. Put him on freeweights with proper training he could be a stud tackle for years to come.

peria jerry is not even close to being big enough to be a NT/ only a handfull of guys in the whole draft are.

and raji is by far the best one out there

jerry would be a de for us, as would hood, and gilbert. and any other dt thats's around 300 or less

the guys that are in the draft that have to size, or are close to the size are

raji
ron brace, from what i read he plays very soft. he'll go late first or early second
terrance taylor- he's a little small at 315. and he doesn't like to work too hard
sammie lee hill, i've seen some really bad stuff on him that he doesn't take well to hard coaching, and has been a classic underachiever

khalif mitchell, east carolina about 320

thats about it for the guys that even come close to having the size to play DT

You are missing a few

Myron Pryor - 6'0, 319
Roy Miller - 6'1, 310
Dorell Scott - 6'3, 312 (more of a swing guy like Hill, but experienced playing in the A gap in college)
Terrence Knighton - 6'3, 321

i only have pryor listed at 310 from a few different sources (mags, net, not people). and i can't find much that has a lot of hope for the guy, what have you seen that's different?

same things have roy miller at 300-302, dorell scott is right, but then they have knighton at 295ish, he must have really balloned before the combine. the temple site even has him at 291 during the season

those guys, for me, are not big enough. unless they go on the double quarter pounder diet

[red]

of course, my ultimate dream would be to pass on raji. find something for a year to help out pickett, maybe grady?

then hope to god we are somehow in a position next year to draft the ultimate mountain of a man............

terrence cody

[Joemailman]

Red, Grady Jackson signed with the Lions

[wist43]

Red, Grady Jackson signed with the Lions

LMAO...

[Waldo]

Think Pryor will last 'til 41, Waldo?

I've been trying to figure out who the #2 NT is for a month.

He should be there in the 3rd, but I wouldn't count on him beyond that.

The thing is, none of them are at Raji's level, including Raji, right now his reputation is much better than the player, but he definitely is the best of the bunch, by a good margin.

Play style is more important than ht/wt. Of all the 3-4 NT's, the only 3 that actually weighed 3-4 NT playing weight on draft day are Wilfork, Ngata, and Pouha. Guys that can hold the point, handle getting double teamed, and can manhandle C's one on one against the run, and naturally understand the use of leverage are the guys that you are looking for.

It depends on what you are looking for. For a backup/developmental guy, this is a great class, a lot of the later guys have the physical ability, frame, and correct playing style. They can be rotational guys from day 1 and take a few snaps here and there. In fact this class can move unusually well, one of the things the later guys typically cannot do. There are probably going to be a few good players down the line that come from the later rounds, that need a little experience and coaching to thrive. With good scouting and some luck a team has a decent chance of landing a guy that is starting quality in 2-3 years.

For a starter, there is only 1, Raji. Raji should be able to displace Pickett by later in the season and surely will next year (no way Pickett will be resigned if we draft Raji, so we'll be looking for Raji's backup next year).

[Bretsky]

I highly doubt Raji is even there

I still think Crabtree is a star and if he's there at nine we should be considering him. Then again that's part of why I believe you help your weakensses in free agency so you can draft the BPA without hardly thinking of needs.

[wist43]

So you're saying that TT does, in fact, always address need - his own protestations not withwithstanding

Yes. I don't feel I am going out on a limb in saying that the Packer's Organization looks at team needs when drafting.

- and that he sucks as a talent evaluator???

Maybe. I think that the finished product didn't add up to what it seemed on paper last year, but two years ago it was the same thing in reverse.

He either doesn't care about needs, and that is why our defense sucks, and OL for that matter; or, he always addresses need, but just plain and simply sucks as a talent evaluator... somehow or another 6-10 has to be accounted for... a bump in the road on the way to winning the next 4 superbowls???

To date, he's a sub .500 GM.

Has to be black and white with you, eh? You seem to ignore the substance of the discussion when you seek a strict yes or no answer. My answer has been a consistent maybe.

No, not necessarily B/W for me... I'm a middle of the roader with TT, i.e. decent talent evaluator (the Harrell fiasco notwithstanding), average GM.

I'm with you to a certain extent on some of this stuff; however, unless TT changes his stripes I'm pretty sure a SB is a long shot...

He's going to have to land a few ProBowl calibur players later in the draft, and the timing is going to have to be such that they peak at just the right time, i.e. b/4 TT has a chance to push his draft class 4 years removed off the roster. I consider the NFL to be a 4 year cycle league... TT has been here four years. Are we substantially better now than we were four years ago??? I would argue we're better, but not that much better, and certainly not nearly good enough.

My God, how many players has he drafted in the last 4 years??? Most in the NFL I'm sure... with another 10-12 coming this year. If his goal is to remain the youngest team in the league year after year... he's aces.

[sharpe1027]

No, not necessarily B/W for me... I'm a middle of the roader with TT, i.e. decent talent evaluator (the Harrell fiasco notwithstanding), average GM.

I'm with you to a certain extent on some of this stuff; however, unless TT changes his stripes I'm pretty sure a SB is a long shot...

He's going to have to land a few ProBowl calibur players later in the draft, and the timing is going to have to be such that they peak at just the right time, i.e. b/4 TT has a chance to push his draft class 4 years removed off the roster. I consider the NFL to be a 4 year cycle league... TT has been here four years. Are we substantially better now than we were four years ago??? I would argue we're better, but not that much better, and certainly not nearly good enough.

My God, how many players has he drafted in the last 4 years??? Most in the NFL I'm sure... with another 10-12 coming this year. If his goal is to remain the youngest team in the league year after year... he's aces.

Yeah, usually people aren't as far off in their ultimate positions as it might seem. Would you want them trade up from #9 then? Who would you like to see the Packers grab?

I would prefer getting out of the top few picks and maybe getting a pick next year in exchange. Some team always seems to over-value the top few picks, and I don't see the value being that much different at the top this year.

I don't think you remain the youngest team in the league unless the new guys are better, which is a good thing. Now that they have some established guys in there, the competition should be much tougher, and I predict we will see more draft picks that don't make the team this year. That is a good sign, however, and doesn't mean that drafting more guys is a bad thing. As long as the guys that do make it are solid contributers, I could care less what round they came from or how many other guys didn't make the team.

[SnakeLH2006]

Snake is a HUGE fan of getting a BJ...ALWAYS. Yet if Raji ain't there I'd settle for "Manboobs" Smith as he'd be a steal at #9 with his talent. Snake don't care as long as we get a starting/franchise NT or OT. We'd better or TT's parking space will have the stank of urine for most of 2009.

[TheCheese]

Waldo you are a bad ass poster, very nice work man.

My guy is still Larry English and I'm hoping we trade down to the 16ish area to take him with some team hoping to scoop up Sanchez.

I gotta admit I'm pretty ignorant on Hood but he sounds intriguing and It very well could be that out from no where pick TT often executes.

I just think English is going to be the best pass rusher out of this draft and if we added him across Kampman that would be hugely beneficial. His Pro day is March 27th and its pretty damn important because of his disappointing 40 yard dash at the combine. I'm not too worried about it though because he had an excellent vertical. I have trust in the pick we go for as long as it's not an ILB or QB. But I would be stoked as hell if we got English to be our rush backer.

[Fritz]

Snake is a HUGE fan of getting a BJ...ALWAYS. Yet if Raji ain't there I'd settle for "Manboobs" Smith as he'd be a steal at #9 with his talent. Snake don't care as long as we get a starting/franchise NT or OT. We'd better or TT's parking space will have the stank of urine for most of 2009.

"Manboobs" Smith.

It's got a ring to it, don't it?

Good work, Snakey boy.

[wist43]

No, not necessarily B/W for me... I'm a middle of the roader with TT, i.e. decent talent evaluator (the Harrell fiasco notwithstanding), average GM.

I'm with you to a certain extent on some of this stuff; however, unless TT changes his stripes I'm pretty sure a SB is a long shot...

He's going to have to land a few ProBowl calibur players later in the draft, and the timing is going to have to be such that they peak at just the right time, i.e. b/4 TT has a chance to push his draft class 4 years removed off the roster. I consider the NFL to be a 4 year cycle league... TT has been here four years. Are we substantially better now than we were four years ago??? I would argue we're better, but not that much better, and certainly not nearly good enough.

My God, how many players has he drafted in the last 4 years??? Most in the NFL I'm sure... with another 10-12 coming this year. If his goal is to remain the youngest team in the league year after year... he's aces.

Yeah, usually people aren't as far off in their ultimate positions as it might seem. Would you want them trade up from #9 then? Who would you like to see the Packers grab?

I would prefer getting out of the top few picks and maybe getting a pick next year in exchange. Some team always seems to over-value the top few picks, and I don't see the value being that much different at the top this year.

I don't think you remain the youngest team in the league unless the new guys are better, which is a good thing. Now that they have some established guys in there, the competition should be much tougher, and I predict we will see more draft picks that don't make the team this year. That is a good sign, however, and doesn't mean that drafting more guys is a bad thing. As long as the guys that do make it are solid contributers, I could care less what round they came from or how many other guys didn't make the team.

I haven't studied the draft much yet... just looked at Orakpo and Raji b/c they fill needs IMO.

In general, I think when you're rebuilding, trading down makes a lot of sense... but once you've reached a level where your roster has been upgraded to a point where you feel like you have competition at every position, and you're backups are legitimately pushing the starters for playing time, then I think you need to look at finding legitimate difference makers.

If that means trading up, then trade up; if it means giving up draft choices for a vet, then do it... TT really hasn't shown a willingness to alter his approach...

Outta time... gotta run... TBC, lol

[sheepshead]

GET OUT OF THE FIRST ROUND NOW!

[Fritz]

Why? Are there no players who can help the Packers that will be available in the first round?

What if Raji was available at #9? Would you still want to get out of the first round?