Clay Matthews

[Noodle]

Ted has picked about 900 guys in his tenure in Green Bay in the 3rd round and later...and doesn't really have all that much to show for it.

Standing pat and taking BPA isn't a way to build a team...you need to identify guys who fit what you need and place a value on them, then go after those guys when you have the chance.

Thompson made the right move IMO...that doesn't mean it will pan out, but I like taking the bold move when you have many areas on the roster that are pretty well settled. Why add 15 more players from the draft when we don't have space for more than probably 5-6 guys to make the final roster?

Leap, we are thinking exactly alike. This was good work by TT, even if the draft chart would say otherwise. And sure, there's a good chance one or both of the guys isn't all that, but by gosh we gave it a real shot.

I'm actually kind of excited about seeing what these guys bring to the table at training camp.

When's the last time you said that after a Packer draft?

[SnakeLH2006]

Ted has picked about 900 guys in his tenure in Green Bay in the 3rd round and later...and doesn't really have all that much to show for it.

Standing pat and taking BPA isn't a way to build a team...you need to identify guys who fit what you need and place a value on them, then go after those guys when you have the chance.

Thompson made the right move IMO...that doesn't mean it will pan out, but I like taking the bold move when you have many areas on the roster that are pretty well settled. Why add 15 more players from the draft when we don't have space for more than probably 5-6 guys to make the final roster?

Leap, we are thinking exactly alike. This was good work by TT, even if the draft chart would say otherwise. And sure, there's a good chance one or both of the guys isn't all that, but by gosh we gave it a real shot.

I'm actually kind of excited about seeing what these guys bring to the table at training camp.

When's the last time you said that after a Packer draft?

Agree with both of ya...Snake is P.U.M.P.E.D.!!! Snake has no qualms with TT sending those picks to NE as it's really moot considering trade values...It looks like alot on paper, but really trading a two, 2 threes, for a top guy at one, and a 5th is like losing a 3rd and a 7th for a guy who Snake really likes.

Not to mention he'll supplant Poops (thank you Jesus) as a guy who will be at least as good as AJ has been so far. Good ass trade for a guy TT and Snake like. Dude is a smart gamer..and is athletically jacked (ran a 4.58 at 240 and JSO projects him at 270-280 lbs. down the line...WTF...read it...it's on there).

At the min. Matthews was a ST beast and then some, and looking at his hilites and scouting reports, he really looks the gamer. At least, he's a HUGE fucking upgrade over Poops...and prob. starts in 2009 across Kampy at OLB.

Plus, who, and Snake can't think of any guys who had such success with his uncle and father being guys who played for 20 years in the NFL (and our pick was asked the same question) who can play that long, and he said he'd love it. GAMER. Athletically stacked and jacked. Loves football, smart, etc.

The only thing Snake wondered about is that there's so many conflicting scouting reports (some say Matthews was the #3 passrusher regardless of position in this draft...some say he's a good coverage guy...some say he's got the pass-rush and has shit to learn on pass-coverage)..

Who the fuck cares? This guy is a hardcore football player on a great stacked team with 3 LB's picked today. He's gonna be no worse than AJ, maybe better.

Snake's stoked. Good pick for the value of player/pedigree we got. Our LB's are beasting now, which is a must have in a dominant 3-4.

A.W.E.S.O.M.E.

[Lurker64]

Plus, when you talk about "getting the short end of the trade" , there's actually a lot of different ways to do the accounting here.

Nobody would have been surprised if Clay Matthews had gone as high as 15. If we had done the same trade and gotten to #15, nobody would have been complaining about losing out on the trade.

Even if you do the math based on the popular chart (which is different than the charts that teams use), we only end up losing by about a fourth round pick. When you consider that one of the thirds that we ended up traded came for a sixth round pick and the rights to a retired player, it doesn't look so bad.

So if you think about it like "We traded a second, a third, a sixth, and the rights to a retired hall of famer for the fifteenth best player in the draft and an extra fifth" it's not so uneven.

A lot of things are a matter of perspective.

[Bretsky]

good spin but if we'd have done the trade and went to 15 we also might have, probably would have, taken a better player. To me you look at the facts.

I could also spin this that they could have kept their second and drafted Barwin, and then traded their two thirds for another second and Barwin, Raji, and the extra second might look better than just the two players. So many ifs.

Only real way to look at it is through the facts of what we gave up and got IMO

[The_Dude]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=4100869

Nice little interview from ESPN.

[sheepshead]

Watching the highlight tapes of Matthews (yes, I know that just shows the good stuff), I'm really impressed with his closing speed. When he sees he's got a shot at a play, he just seems to kick in another gear.

Plus, anyone who can walk on at USC and eventually make the starting roster and be a standout like him is impressive as hell just with that.

Yep, his highlights were nice.. Couple of WOW plays. Did you guys hear TT played with his Dad? I had a mixed reaction to that.

[wist43]

Plus, when you talk about "getting the short end of the trade" , there's actually a lot of different ways to do the accounting here.

Nobody would have been surprised if Clay Matthews had gone as high as 15. If we had done the same trade and gotten to #15, nobody would have been complaining about losing out on the trade.

Even if you do the math based on the popular chart (which is different than the charts that teams use), we only end up losing by about a fourth round pick. When you consider that one of the thirds that we ended up traded came for a sixth round pick and the rights to a retired player, it doesn't look so bad.

So if you think about it like "We traded a second, a third, a sixth, and the rights to a retired hall of famer for the fifteenth best player in the draft and an extra fifth" it's not so uneven.

A lot of things are a matter of perspective.

Yeah, but I wouldn't have been surprised if had still been there at our 2nd pick either...

I never really looked at Matthews b/c my attitude was, "let someone else make that mistake"... and of course he was projected to go somewhere at the end of the 1st, early 2nd... so didn't figure TT would be in position to even consider him.

All of that said, I never really looked very hard at him... but what I did see and read of him lead me to believe he was way overrated.

He's very thin in the lower body, got shoved around a lot in the clips I saw... don't think he has any chance to hold the point until he puts on some weight and gets stronger... looks like at least a couple year project to me at this point.

I'll give the pick a chance though, but that's mainly b/c I'm so happy with the Raji the pick

[Joemailman]

Wist, I don't think there's any way Matthews would have been there with the #41 pick, because I think Belichick would would have taken him at #26 if he couldn't swing the trade. I think TT knew it, and that's why he was willing to give up as much as he did.

[Harlan Huckleby]

It looks like alot on paper, but really trading a two, 2 threes, for a top guy at one, and a 5th is like losing a 3rd and a 7th for a guy who Snake really likes.

This sounds like Floyd the barber thinking out loud.

The talk that Clay Mathews was really the 15th player in the draft is groundless speculation. Some probably also think he was really the 50th best. Its not completely certain where Mathews would have gone if the Packers hadn't moved up. The best information is that Mathews is the 26th best player because that's where a GM took a chance.

The Packers gave two third round players for the privilege of moving up from #41 to #26. (The fifth round pick coming back counts ver little.) I think that's a little pricey. Not outrageous, but risky.

[Waldo]

It looks like alot on paper, but really trading a two, 2 threes, for a top guy at one, and a 5th is like losing a 3rd and a 7th for a guy who Snake really likes.

This sounds like Floyd the barber thinking out loud.

The talk that Clay Mathews was really the 15th player in the draft is groundless speculation. Some probably also think he was really the 50th best. Its not completely certain where Mathews would have gone if the Packers hadn't moved up. The best information is that Mathews is the 26th best player because that's where a GM took a chance.

The Packers gave two third round players for the privilege of moving up from #41 to #26. (The fifth round pick coming back counts ver little.) I think that's a little pricey. Not outrageous, but risky.

Crossing tier lines is expensive.

Team don't like to do it and need an offer they can't refuse.

[Joemailman]

It's not that pricey if you feel, as some do, that this was a fairly weak draft after the top 50. TT may have felt that the quality in the 3rd round wasn't much better than the 4th and 5th rounds. Besides, the packers are the youngest team in the league. At some point, having tons of picks becomes a case of diminishing returns. You can end up drafting guys who aren't much younger, and maybe aren't any better than the guys you have now.

[jmbarnes101]

Watching the highlight tapes of Matthews (yes, I know that just shows the good stuff), I'm really impressed with his closing speed. When he sees he's got a shot at a play, he just seems to kick in another gear.

Plus, anyone who can walk on at USC and eventually make the starting roster and be a standout like him is impressive as hell just with that.

Yep, his highlights were nice.. Couple of WOW plays. Did you guys hear TT played with his Dad? I had a mixed reaction to that.

He played with his uncle and was sure he played against Clay but never actually knew him.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Crossing tier lines is expensive.

Now this sounds like "step on a crack, break your mother's back." Do you really think GMs are superstitous?

I imagine GMs look strictly at draft position, don't give a hoot about round numbers. Maybe you are right somehow, maybe there is a lot of symbolism and irrational decision making, but that surprises me.

[Harlan Huckleby]

It's not that pricey if you feel, as some do, that this was a fairly weak draft after the top 50.

I suppose this is possible.

I'm not sure drafts can actually vary that drastically from year to year. How could they? Just statistically, by the later rounds, its a significant sample of players selected from a population of 10,000 college athletes. How could that large population vary drastically from year to year? High sunspot activity in some years? Pussyfication of youngsters when Democrats are in office?

[sheepshead]

Watching the highlight tapes of Matthews (yes, I know that just shows the good stuff), I'm really impressed with his closing speed. When he sees he's got a shot at a play, he just seems to kick in another gear.

Plus, anyone who can walk on at USC and eventually make the starting roster and be a standout like him is impressive as hell just with that.

Yep, his highlights were nice.. Couple of WOW plays. Did you guys hear TT played with his Dad? I had a mixed reaction to that.

He played with his uncle and was sure he played against Clay but never actually knew him.

roger that.