Some Super Thoughts

[Patler]

I like the original post Smidge. Here's something to consider. Of the top teams, each of them has had some down years, resulting in higher picks the next year. The three top teams, with the exception of the Sherman years, place huge value on draft picks, and consistently draft well. The three keys to good drafting: Get a large number of picks that can fill your roster with decent talent. Get a few lower round gems to provide near blue chip players. Get a few blue chip players, especially QBs, that can run your team for a decade or more. How do most teams get blue chip players? You get them with gems and by not screwing up when you have those rare high picks following a down year. TT pretty much failed on this in 2006, but made up for it in spades in 2009. Roethlesburger, Manning, and Rodgers were pretty much picked at a spot in the draft with the expectation they would be blue chip players; Brady was a late round gem. The impressive thing is when organizations don't have frequent down years or down years that get them into the top 5-10 in the draft, but are still able to secure quality players. All the top organizations are alike in this regard.

I don't want to quibble, because I agree with your general, overall statement. However, there are two details I will comment on.

First, I don't agree that Rodgers was taken at a spot where you expect to get a blue chip player. That would presume that there are 24 blue chip players in every draft, and there aren't. Not even close.

Second, I think you are a bit harsh regarding the 2006 draft. Do I wish Hawk was better? Sure, but he has been a starter for 5 years and he filled a huge need that the team had at the time. In retrospect, there are players picked lower that would have been better values, but getting a guy who is likely to be a 10 year starter somewhere in the NFL is hardly a failure.

[vince]

It's downright depressing looking at TT's 2007 draft. He's made up for it with the others but man that one was bad.

Harrell, Jackson, Jones, Rouse, Barbre, Clowney, Hall, Bishop, Crosby, Wynn, Harris

[swede]

It's downright depressing looking at TT's 2007 draft. He's made up for it with the others but man that one was bad.

Harrell, Jackson, Jones, Rouse, Barbre, Clowney, Hall, Bishop, Crosby, Wynn, Harris

Well, it wasn't Raji-Matthews, but aren't five of those players still with the team?

[mmmdk]

Substract the Tuna from the G-men and no super bowls! Some guys never learn.

[vince]

Well, it wasn't Raji-Matthews, but aren't five of those players still with the team?

You'd like to see 3 starters from a draft. I guess you could call Bishop and Crosby starters.

[vince]

Substract the Tuna from the G-men and no super bowls! Some guys never learn.

No sense in letting the facts get in the way of a good storyline.

[mraynrand]

Substract the Tuna from the G-men and no super bowls! Some guys never learn.

Subtract Belichick from the Tuna, and maybe you get Marty Schottenheimer.

[mmmdk]

No sense in letting the facts get in the way of a good storyline.

...but I believe we can win it all. Lombardi trophy coming home BABY. Stubby ain't that bad. What a legend McCarthy can build...'cos Bears, most likely, will be next.

[mraynrand]

Well, it wasn't Raji-Matthews, but aren't five of those players still with the team?

6 players!

[vince]

If only Marty Schottenheimer wouldn't have taught Ernest Byner to fumble in that game, he coulda been a good coach.

[mmmdk]

In Seattle the crowd is the 12th man...Stubby makes it a 13th man. How's that gonna unfold? Packers roll on & Lombardi throphy back in Green Bay. YEAH!!! Bring on anyone, anywhere! Don't matter 'cos we win.

[mraynrand]

I don't want to quibble, because I agree with your general, overall statement. However, there are two details I will comment on.

First, I don't agree that Rodgers was taken at a spot where you expect to get a blue chip player. That would presume that there are 24 blue chip players in every draft, and there aren't. Not even close.

Second, I think you are a bit harsh regarding the 2006 draft. Do I wish Hawk was better? Sure, but he has been a starter for 5 years and he filled a huge need that the team had at the time. In retrospect, there are players picked lower that would have been better values, but getting a guy who is likely to be a 10 year starter somewhere in the NFL is hardly a failure.

OK, I agree with you on the 24th pick point (but Rodgers was supposed to go higher!)

The point about Hawk and the #5 pick is it really hurts your team to be bad enough to get a #5 pick and then not have that pick be a blue chipper. There were extenuating circumstances, since there were many other busts and disappointments at the top of that draft (which supports your first point), but that always seemed to me to be the ideal time for TT to trade down. I think he thought Hawk was going to be an Urlacher in his impact.

The final overall point is that the teams on the top, that stay on the top, pick well more often than not. I think we pretty much know TT has the kind of high percentage on picks to keep the Packers in that top 5 of successful teams.

[mraynrand]

If only Marty Schottenheimer wouldn't have taught Ernest Byner to fumble in that game, he coulda been a good coach.

That only would have tied the game - Shittenheimer would have figured out a way to lose it in OT.

[Smidgeon]

Harrell, Jackson, Jones, Rouse, Barbre, Clowney, Hall, Bishop, Crosby, Wynn, Harris

Well, it wasn't Raji-Matthews, but aren't five of those players still with the team?

6 players. Harrell isn't gone yet.

[swede]

6 players. Harrell isn't gone yet.

I was going to get an argument from someone either way. I knew I should have gone with 5 and a half.

btw--who was Harris again?