Understanding the Neal Pick

[mission]

First of all, Mel Kiper is a cokehead. That's pretty obvious.

Second, it's clear that TT used combine numbers as a tiebreaker if there ever was some indecision on his part. The guy cleaned up and TT more and more has been trusting some key performance numbers .. we've had guys like Waldo provide statistical support for this thought.

Plus he's a Big Ten, midwest, Packer kind of guy. I don't know much about the character of the other guys but TT selecting Neal isn't much of a surprise in retrospect.

I understand wondering if he got the value right but that's just something we won't know for some time now.

[pbmax]

First of all, Mel Kiper is a cokehead. That's pretty obvious.

Take one dollar from petty cash. That was BOMNF! Also, POTWH when I read it.

[falco]

Great thread.

[Bretsky]

Instead we have nothing. That nothingness doesn't justify Ted's reluctance to take a gamble, especially over a 3rd round talent like Michael Neal.

Neal is a 2nd round talent.

Why, because he was drafted in the second round?

I hope I'm wrong. I don't see it. I live in Big Ten country, I've seen him play (albeit not a whole lot, but some). Others that have seen him far more than I have don't paint a much rosier picture than I have. Maybe I'm wrong, hopefully I'm wrong, but I'm not the only person who feels that Neal was drafted a full round to high.

Maybe I'm right.

GUN

gotta say

I completely agree with you. I watched a lof of Big Ten Ball. The guy was decent. Firmly believe we couldn't nabbed him 15+ picks later....with some solid effort probably netted a 4th or 5th at worse back. Throughout this draft teams were looking to trade up. If they lose Neal there were others very similar.

[Bretsky]

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.

I'm sure several are reading at least ten sources of draft projections. I hardly watch Mel anymore; the NFL Network is far better. Regardless as all these guys do is interview mulitple GM's for the most part and repeat their projections IMO

[Bretsky]

Granted these are just media types, not scouts. But they couldn't have all just been dead wrong while half the teams in the NFL think Neal is the better prospect, can they?

Media types had Jimmy Clausen and Taylor Mays in the first round. Media types had Tyson Alualu in the second or third. Media types all thought the Chiefs were going to take Bulaga. These guys are wrong all the time.

I hope you are not trying to discredit the debate; all entitle to views and we should never assume because TT did it then it was the right call. It'd be fairly easy to find some second rounders he overvalued in the past as evidence that this is fair to argue about.

[Gunakor]

Instead we have nothing. That nothingness doesn't justify Ted's reluctance to take a gamble, especially over a 3rd round talent like Michael Neal.

Neal is a 2nd round talent.

Why, because he was drafted in the second round?

I hope I'm wrong. I don't see it. I live in Big Ten country, I've seen him play (albeit not a whole lot, but some). Others that have seen him far more than I have don't paint a much rosier picture than I have. Maybe I'm wrong, hopefully I'm wrong, but I'm not the only person who feels that Neal was drafted a full round to high.

Maybe I'm right.

GUN

gotta say

I completely agree with you. I watched a lof of Big Ten Ball. The guy was decent. Firmly believe we couldn't nabbed him 15+ picks later....with some solid effort probably netted a 4th or 5th at worse back. Throughout this draft teams were looking to trade up. If they lose Neal there were others very similar.

Like I have been saying, I'd have been happy with a 6 or a 7 that we could have packaged with our 5 and moved up in the 5th round. I like Quarless, I think he has the tools to be great, but for the Packers I thought we could have done better. If only we had the ammo to move up just 5 spots in that 5th round...

Zoltan Mesko would be a Packer.

[Bretsky]

I'd like to apologize to GUN for not coming to the debate sooner !!!!!!!!!!

I've put my pads on so now.....let's rock........

[Gunakor]

I'd like to apologize to GUN for not coming to the debate sooner !!!!!!!!!!

I've put my pads on so now.....let's rock........

It's okay B, I held my own pretty well. The fort is still standing.

[Bretsky]

I think TT might have been able to find a trading partner to move down 10-15 spots and have gotten Neal anyway.

Everyone seems to think this is such an easy thing to pull off. Us trading back means one of those teams needed to move up to get their man AND also give up picks to us to do so. If it didn't happen it was for a reason, and the most likely one was nobody wanted to trade up. also, assuming that because it didn't happen means TT didn't try to trade back is also a reach, isn't it? (unless TT has already been quoted as saying he didn't try)

takes two to tango

Actually this year was the year trades were much easier than the past and there must have been a record number of trades for a 7 round draft.Go look at round two and see how many of those picks were original around us

We picked 56

55 58 59 60 62 all acquired via trade

There seemed to be lots of partners out there to tango if you were willing to make the calls and find one

Dallas traded up to the spot before us to draft a ILB we most likely had no interest in

[Bretsky]

Instead we have nothing. That nothingness doesn't justify Ted's reluctance to take a gamble, especially over a 3rd round talent like Michael Neal.

Neal is a 2nd round talent.

Why, because he was drafted in the second round?

I hope I'm wrong. I don't see it. I live in Big Ten country, I've seen him play (albeit not a whole lot, but some). Others that have seen him far more than I have don't paint a much rosier picture than I have. Maybe I'm wrong, hopefully I'm wrong, but I'm not the only person who feels that Neal was drafted a full round to high.

Maybe I'm right.

GUN

gotta say

I completely agree with you. I watched a lof of Big Ten Ball. The guy was decent. Firmly believe we couldn't nabbed him 15+ picks later....with some solid effort probably netted a 4th or 5th at worse back. Throughout this draft teams were looking to trade up. If they lose Neal there were others very similar.

Like I have been saying, I'd have been happy with a 6 or a 7 that we could have packaged with our 5 and moved up in the 5th round. I like Quarless, I think he has the tools to be great, but for the Packers I thought we could have done better. If only we had the ammo to move up just 5 spots in that 5th round...

Zoltan Mesko would be a Packer.

That DAM BELLICHEK; he tapped into my phones and heard about all the pimping I did to TT about

The Zoltan

[Gunakor]

That DAM BELLICHEK; he tapped into my phones and heard about all the pimping I did to TT about

The Zoltan

So it's YOUR fault?

[Guiness]

Actually this year was the year trades were much easier than the past and there must have been a record number of trades for a 7 round draft.Go look at round two and see how many of those picks were original around us

We picked 56

55 58 59 60 62 all acquired via trade

There seemed to be lots of partners out there to tango if you were willing to make the calls and find one

you could take an alternate view - a lot of teams willing to trade out of those spots, so there was effectively a fire sale on the picks, and TT didn't feel he was getting value.

If you want a 5th rounder to drop back 8 spots in the 2nd, and someone else will do it for a 7th...might as well keep your pick, right?

[Guiness]

[quote="Bretsky"][quote="Scott Campbell"]

I'm sure several are reading at least ten sources of draft projections. I hardly watch Mel anymore; the NFL Network is far better. Regardless as all these guys do is interview mulitple GM's for the most part and repeat their projections IMO

Not that GMs blow smoke or anything.

Holmgren's little 'I don't like Clausen, I never said I don't like Clausen', then passing on him three times was nothing if it wasn't double secret squirrel behavior!

[Gunakor]

If you want a 5th rounder to drop back 8 spots in the 2nd, and someone else will do it for a 7th...might as well keep your pick, right?

Not necessarily, at least if I'm understanding your question correctly. Not if you think you can find equal value 8 spots down the line. Take whatever is offered, which is more than you'd get by just keeping your pick. The gamble is that all equal value will be taken off the board in those 8 spots you move back, but if you're fairly certain that your guy or someone similar is going to be there you may as well take the 7th and get your guy anyway.