Understanding the Neal Pick

[packers11]

Plus, I mean, Thompson's guys had a 2nd round grade on Neal. Who's to say anybody here, or anybody else, knows better?

Thompson had a second round grade on Daryn Colledge too. Thompson ain't perfect. He's very good, but he makes his fair share of mistakes, same as anyone else.

This was one of them.

haha yes, hes already wrong before the guy even steps on the field... in 3-4 years you can grade this 2nd round pick... but for now there is no way you can say he already "screwed it up" ...

[Gunakor]

Plus, when people say things like "Terrence Cody was a much more highly rated prospect" it does sort of betray a certain ignorance about the evaluation of prospects. Cody is a guy who is an interesting story, and he's blocked a few really low kicks. But everything else should scare the living daylights out of NFL talent evaluators. He's the slowest kid ever drafted, he's got no lateral agility, he has to be kept to a very low snap count, and he could easily eat himself out of the league.

A guy with a lot of buzz, but a really, really risky pick.

Alex Carrington, drafted #72 by the Buffalo Bills, would have been IMO the best bet out of that group of DL. Probably better than Neal actually. He's certainly the guy I'd have taken if Neal had dropped off, but to be honest, I think he's much more worth a #56 pick than Neal to begin with. Time will tell on that one.

Cody was probably the last guy I was thinking of for the Packers, especially having both Pickett and Raji to play the nose already. No way I can see Cody out on the end, because as you say, he's slow and not very agile.

[Pugger]

but I know Thompson didn't offer that trade or anything similar to anybody else to move down.

Source?

Seriously though, you know this?

Put yourself in the shoes of an NFL GM.

Someone calls you and makes you an offer where you move up 15-20 slots from a high 3rd to a low 2nd, and all it costs you is a 7th round pick. Are you going to say no?

Nobody else would either.

I wasn't there. Like I said, I used logic and applied it. No GM worth the ink he signed his contract with would turn down an offer like that.

If what you say is true about all GMs automatically taking that offer, then it is logical to conclude that the trade is really bad for one team and it stands to reason that no GM worth the ink of their signed contract would/should ever offer that trade.

Indeed it is, if you're judging the trade by that Jimmy Johnson point value chart. You're missing the point though, as are most people here. The fact that it seems so idiotic to make that trade is the reason why I'm suggesting it be made in the first place. I'm using the point value chart to add value to the Packers, not points. The value to the Packers isn't determined by some point value chart that the team the Packers would be trading with would be using. The value to the Packers is quite simply in the extra picks in whatever round we'd have had on top of drafting Neal.

What is better for Green Bay, Having Neal and an extra 7th round pick or having Neal and no extra 7th round pick? That's really the argument I'm making, in a nutshell. We wound up with absolutely nothing on top of the Neal pick, and my argument is simply that we could have had Neal and SOMETHING else.

I'm just setting up a scenario where the Packers would have netted more out of the draft as a whole than they did in reality. I firmly believe, as many do including both fans and media draft gurus, that Neal was a 3rd round prospect at best. That there's no way in hell he'd have gone by the end of the second round, especially with higher rated DT/DE's still on the board. So if we were going to draft him at #54 anyway, may as well move down to the bottom of the second round where he'd still be available and take whatever you can get from anybody you can get it from. Even if the Packers lose out according to the point value of the picks, it wins because it gets the player it wants and more.

You may be correct IF Neal would have still been around later than he was taken. We have no clue if Neal was or wasn't on anyone else's board no matter what the media draft gurus say. TT and most likely Capers wanted Neal and took him when they did just in case. I have no problem with that. If Neal helps with our pass rush and keeps Jenkins, Jolly and Pickett fresher in games then I like this pick.

[pbmax]

This isn't about the value chart Leap. It's about having Neal vs. having Neal AND another pick. That was an Al Davis-esque reach to grab him there. He wasn't going any time soon.

There is no way we, as fans, can know this. Its a flat guess. And teams, even after the fact, aren't going to fess up.

You're right, I can't know this entirely for certain. But it's not exactly throwing darts blind. There's some factual evidence to support my claim that he was taken out of position. It's a guess, but it's an educated guess.

For shits and giggles, who drafting immediately behind us do you think would have snagged him? I mean, was there any cause for concern that he might be gone in a very short while?

The only other DL taken in round 2 after us was Terrance Cody, taken immediately after us. Cody was by far the more highly rated prospect, odds are Baltimore was going to take him anyway. No DL was taken after that until 3rd round #72, the pick after we selected Morgan Burnett, when Buffalo took Alex Carrington, another more highly rated DL. Odds are Buffalo takes him over Neal also, though I'm not so sure. However, I am 99% certain that Neal would have fallen at least this far.

You are guessing at a moving target. Between the Packers selection of Neal and Cody, were there any other D lineman with a second round grade (or higher) that teams avoided to take other positions?

Once you remove Neal and Cody, the absence of a D line selection into the third could be evidence of the position's weakness at that point, the same as it could be evidence that there were no teams with a need. If a player drops further than expected it can change plans. Not every team is picking need.

[packers11]

I have faith in Teddy... My main problem wasn't the player but the position...
Most of the fans don't have the film tape of the individual player, the best case I can show is what the media pumps out to the fans so they can root for a player to get drafted...

Exhibit a:

Draft Countdown 2006 : Best WR Prospect (top 10)
1.Santonio Holmes, Ohio St.
2.Chad Jackson, Florida
3. Sinorice Moss, Miami (FL)
4. Derek Hagan, Arizona St.
5. Demetrius Williams, Oregon
6. Martin Nance, Miami (OH)
7. Maurice Stovall, Notre Dame
8. Jason Avant, Michigan
9. Greg Jennings, Western Michigan
10. Greg Lee, Pittsburgh

Exhibit b:

Draft Countdown 2005:

Nick Collins was ranked #14th best CB... CB!!!

...

It was reported in the 2006 draft that Denver was going to take Greg Jennings but the packers scooped him up... At the time I was pissed Denver didn't get the chance to do that....

Now I know as fans we want certain players, but I do trust T.T. a lot more than myself... This Neal pick could turn out to be one of the better picks in T.T's tenure, or another "Brohm" pick... Lets atleast wait 2-3 years before we can judge...

[Gunakor]

Fair enough. I'd just have liked it more if it had netted us another pick. Because even if we did trade down and Neal was taken, Carrington was still there too and he's probably going to be just as good.

Time will tell. I think Neal will be a good player. I just can't shake the feeling that we could have gotten more with that pick.

[packers11]

Time will tell. I think Neal will be a good player. I just can't shake the feeling that we could have gotten more with that pick.

I agree in that aspect... You never know... Just like with the Jennings/Collins pick, why the fk not trade down? Looking back at it, I would of traded up for them

But then you can play devils advocate...

You defiantly could have traded down on the Brohm / Colledge / Nelson picks...

[sharpe1027]

Not by itself, no. But there were at least 2 and perhaps 3 other DL prospects who graded out as high or higher than Neal that were still on the board, and I'd have been happy with any of them should Neal have been taken early.

I doubt the Packers agreed with you. If they did, you have a point. If not, they did the right thing.

We wouldn't have to use that 7th round pick to draft in the 7th round, we could have repackaged it with say our 5th and, if needs be, our own 7th to move up 4 spots in the 5th round and grab that Zoltan Mesko punter extraordinaire from Michigan. He'd most certainly make the team - he would fill perhaps the most glaring hole on our roster - and he undoubtedly wasn't going to make it into UDFA.

That's complete hindsight. The experts so-called experts you use for your grading of Neal can't even pick who will be in the first round with consistency (Claussen is a prime example), yet you claim to have been able to be able to say with certainty that this particular 7th rounder pick for sure? I'm not buying it.

In that scenario, is it worth losing Neal and having to "settle" on an equally talented prospect to move down 10 spots or so? Yes, IMO it most certainly is. I don't think you really appreciate what the reward would be. You're still thinking of a 7th round pick. I'm still thinking about the 5th round, and what better things we could have done with that 5th round pick rather than spend it on a luxury item with a troublesome history. Move down in the second, move UP in the 5th, both times giving way more value than we get in return, and wind up with TWO players you want instead of one.

If everything works out, it is better. It's still a risk vs. reward determination. Maybe they should have taken more risk, but it is not as open and shut as you have been arguing. That's all I'm saying.

[Cleft Crusty]

After pulling in all my extensive NFL contacts, I have determined that Neal was the highest player remaining on the draft boards of at least 8 teams when the Packers selected. He was second on at least 6 others. It was almost certain that 1) he would have been picked within at least 1-5 positions of where he was selected had the Packers not selected him and 2) the Packers would have had a limited group of teams with which to trade down, with very little guarantee of having Neal available after such a trade. All my sources are anonymous, but highly reliable, just like the scouts used by my old friend at the UrinalScented, Bob McGinn.

[Gunakor]

Between the Packers selection of Neal and Cody, were there any other D lineman with a second round grade (or higher) that teams avoided to take other positions?

Haha, well, no... because there weren't any players at all selected between Neal and Cody. They went in succession. #'s 56 and 57.

If you're asking if there were any other DL with a second round grade or higher between the Neal pick and where I'd have hoped TT could trade down to, yes there was. Alex Carrington. He had a 2nd round grade while Neal had a 3rd round grade. Neal went #56, Carrington went #72. I haven't heard any knocks against Carrington that would cause him to slip into the third round, so I have to assume that the reason he slipped so far is because we took Neal at #56 rather than Carrington.

Suppose we don't take Neal at 56, instead moving down 10 spots or so. Odds are if some other team were to snag a DL it would have been Carrington, meaning Neal falls to us anyway. If they take Neal instead, Carrington is still there for us. Yes this is guesswork - the entire draft is pretty much an educated guess. But with 2 similar talents at the same position you'd like to draft both being on the board when the clock starts ticking, there isn't a horrible amount of risk in trading down a bit.

[Lurker64]

Suppose we don't take Neal at 56, instead moving down 10 spots or so. Odds are if some other team were to snag a DL it would have been Carrington, meaning Neal falls to us anyway. If they take Neal instead, Carrington is still there for us.

How are you sure that other teams didn't prefer Neal to Carrington and/or Thompson really didn't like Carrington that much?

Suppose for a minute that Thompson had a 2nd round grade on Neal and a fourth round grade on Carrington...

[rbaloha1]

Plus, I mean, Thompson's guys had a 2nd round grade on Neal. Who's to say anybody here, or anybody else, knows better?

Thompson had a second round grade on Daryn Colledge too. Thompson ain't perfect. He's very good, but he makes his fair share of mistakes, same as anyone else.

This was one of them.

Good point -- clear mistake. TT gets the benefit of the doubt for Neal.

Lets wait for the pre season to gauge Neal. IMO Neal is not the same level as Anthony Spencer.

[Scott Campbell]

If you're asking if there were any other DL with a second round grade or higher between the Neal pick and where I'd have hoped TT could trade down to, yes there was. Alex Carrington. He had a 2nd round grade while Neal had a 3rd round grade. Neal went #56, Carrington went #72. I haven't heard any knocks against Carrington that would cause him to slip into the third round, so I have to assume that the reason he slipped so far is because we took Neal at #56 rather than Carrington.

This is a great example of people trusting Mel (and his media ilk) more than Ted.

[Cleft Crusty]

If you're asking if there were any other DL with a second round grade or higher between the Neal pick and where I'd have hoped TT could trade down to, yes there was. Alex Carrington. He had a 2nd round grade while Neal had a 3rd round grade. Neal went #56, Carrington went #72. I haven't heard any knocks against Carrington that would cause him to slip into the third round, so I have to assume that the reason he slipped so far is because we took Neal at #56 rather than Carrington.

Clefty read this and wonders: Has the medication started working yet or did I take too much?

[Gunakor]

Suppose we don't take Neal at 56, instead moving down 10 spots or so. Odds are if some other team were to snag a DL it would have been Carrington, meaning Neal falls to us anyway. If they take Neal instead, Carrington is still there for us.

How are you sure that other teams didn't prefer Neal to Carrington and/or Thompson really didn't like Carrington that much?

Suppose for a minute that Thompson had a 2nd round grade on Neal and a fourth round grade on Carrington...

That wouldn't make any sense to me. They look like the same player. 5 tech players, great athletes, stout against the run, can collapse the pocket, perfect body builds for playing the ends in a 3-4...

Am I missing anything here?

If Thompson really had them graded like that and followed his board I can't be too upset with him. But I'd be furiously disappointed in his scouts.