Redraft of '09

[cheesner]

http://www.gbnreport.com/2009redo.html

I found this interesting. 3 Packers would have gone in the 1st round if it were re-held today (according to 1 guy anyhow)

Does this mean that Brad Jones was the steal of the draft if he should have gone in the 1st?

[Smidgeon]

Re: Redraft of '09

http://www.gbnreport.com/2009redo.html

I found this interesting. 3 Packers would have gone in the 1st round if it were re-held today (according to 1 guy anyhow)

Does this mean that Brad Jones was the steal of the draft if he should have gone in the 1st?

I'd still take Stafford over Sanchez. The kid's going to be a star if he doesn't get DCS (David Carr Syndrome). He seems to have the leadership to win, he's aggressive, and he's tough. Sanchez rode a strong D and running game. He's not bad, but I'd still take Stafford.

[Brandon494]

That dude doesn't know what he is talking about. Brad Jones in the 1st round? Give me a break

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Redraft of '09

http://www.gbnreport.com/2009redo.html

I found this interesting. 3 Packers would have gone in the 1st round if it were re-held today (according to 1 guy anyhow)

Does this mean that Brad Jones was the steal of the draft if he should have gone in the 1st?

It looks to me like MN did even better than we did. I think our biggest steal was Mathews.

[cheesner]

Re: Redraft of '09

http://www.gbnreport.com/2009redo.html

I found this interesting. 3 Packers would have gone in the 1st round if it were re-held today (according to 1 guy anyhow)

Does this mean that Brad Jones was the steal of the draft if he should have gone in the 1st?

It looks to me like MN did even better than we did. I think our biggest steal was Mathews.

From the actual pick in the 200+ to #30 or from #24 to #5. Both great testaments to TT's drafting prowess.

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Redraft of '09

http://www.gbnreport.com/2009redo.html

I found this interesting. 3 Packers would have gone in the 1st round if it were re-held today (according to 1 guy anyhow)

Does this mean that Brad Jones was the steal of the draft if he should have gone in the 1st?

It looks to me like MN did even better than we did. I think our biggest steal was Mathews.

From the actual pick in the 200+ to #30 or from #24 to #5. Both great testaments to TT's drafting prowess.

Great draft. Lets pull out the NFL point value chart.


24 to 5 (Mathews) is worth 960.
201 to 30 (Jones) is worth 609.
9 to 16 (Raji) cost him 350.



22 to 2 (Harvin) was worth a whopping 1820.
54 to 10 (Loadholt) is worth 940.

[hoosier]

Beware of pundits who pretend to be able to evaluate a draft after one season.

[channtheman]

Beware of pundits who pretend to be able to evaluate a draft after one season.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Wouldn't it have made more sense to go back to the draft from 2007 and rate that one?

[Scott Campbell]

Beware of pundits who pretend to be able to evaluate a draft after one season.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Wouldn't it have made more sense to go back to the draft from 2007 and rate that one?

Not with who we drafted.

[Smidgeon]

Here's another redraft:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/12/15/redraft/index.html

Clay Matthews and BJ Raji remain in Round 1 but basically flip spots with Clay at #9 and Raji going to Minnesota later.

[get louder at lambeau]

Here's another redraft:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/12/15/redraft/index.html

Clay Matthews and BJ Raji remain in Round 1 but basically flip spots with Clay at #9 and Raji going to Minnesota later.

That guy has 3 of the OTs drafted in the top 10 as not being first round picks in his re-draft.

[Smidgeon]

Here's another redraft:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/12/15/redraft/index.html

Clay Matthews and BJ Raji remain in Round 1 but basically flip spots with Clay at #9 and Raji going to Minnesota later.

That guy has 3 of the OTs drafted in the top 10 as not being first round picks in his re-draft.

Yeah. And this redraft, in my humble opinion, is probably a little more accurate than the first one in the thread. But both are ridiculous after only one year of play. Some redrafts are ridiculous even three years later. I read a redraft of the 2005 draft written in 2008. It had Derek Anderson being taken in the top 10 and AR dropping to 26. If that redraft was done today, Anderson would probably be at most a round 2 or 3 prospect and AR would be #1 overall.

[cheesner]

Beware of pundits who pretend to be able to evaluate a draft after one season.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Wouldn't it have made more sense to go back to the draft from 2007 and rate that one?

You run the draft based on the information you have. If you drafted prior to the combine (i know that makes no sense), your draft would look much different. If you drafted after the regular college season, your draft would look different again. Of course in a couple more years you have additional information and you can come up with another redraft. Doesn't mean we cannot use the information we have now, and formulate an opinion now.

[Scott Campbell]

Beware of pundits who pretend to be able to evaluate a draft after one season.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Wouldn't it have made more sense to go back to the draft from 2007 and rate that one?

You run the draft based on the information you have. If you drafted prior to the combine (i know that makes no sense), your draft would look much different. If you drafted after the regular college season, your draft would look different again. Of course in a couple more years you have additional information and you can come up with another redraft. Doesn't mean we cannot use the information we have now, and formulate an opinion now.

It was a fun exercise, no doubt - particularly in a year where we nailed it.

[Guiness]

That guy has 3 of the OTs drafted in the top 10 as not being first round picks in his re-draft.

Yeah. And this redraft, in my humble opinion, is probably a little more accurate than the first one in the thread. But both are ridiculous after only one year of play. Some redrafts are ridiculous even three years later. I read a redraft of the 2005 draft written in 2008. It had Derek Anderson being taken in the top 10 and AR dropping to 26. If that redraft was done today, Anderson would probably be at most a round 2 or 3 prospect and AR would be #1 overall.

True enough about A-Rod going top now, but a lot changes every year. Without looking at the '05 draft, maybe there was an RB who made an impact for 4 years, but dropped off this year? RB is a short lived position. It's not fair to say he was a bad pick because he's done now.

But dropping those OT's off the top of the board is silly. In most cases, if you asked the GM's, they would draft them again, they are an investment in the future. They aren't expected them to pull a Joe Thomas and start at LT day one.