Rate the 2008 draft

[channtheman]

How big of a "flaw" does it have to be to not give him an "A" grade? How many games can he miss before he can be legitimately downgraded from an "A" grade? Can you legitimately combine these situations in arriving at your final grade?

I just don't see an "A". Finley is a good TE with great potential, and could be the best TE Green Bay has ever seen. But, today, he isn't that guy, yet. How you can give an "A" at this point in his career baffles me. You don't give A's on potential. You give them on achievement. Well, at least I do.

I like this post. We always talk about how grading a draft immediately afterwards is stupid, mainly because you are grading on potential or what you think might happen. So 3 years later and some of us are still grading on potential. We have to go with what Finley has done to this point. Right now Finley is a B, maybe. I could see arguments for grading him a C. Finley could turn into an A but he has yet to actually consistently perform on the field. He is not an A yet.

[Brandon494]

Why do we keep saying Finley has pontenial? He has already shown he has the talent of a top 5 TE. Go back and see if there is any other player you would take over Finley with that pick. If not how would you not grade it an "A"? Does anyone disagree that when healthy Finley is a top TE in the league? Does anyone think his injury last season is career ending or he's shown to be injury prone? Bottom line guy doesnt have top 5 pontenial, he is a top 5 TE who we got in the 3rd. Final grade "A"! If he was a 1st round pick I wouldn't be giving him an A but only using a 3rd come on.

[sharpe1027]

Why do we keep saying Finley has pontenial? He has already shown he has the talent of a top 5 TE. Go back and see if there is any other player you would take over Finley with that pick. If not how would you not grade it an "A"? Does anyone disagree that when healthy Finley is a top TE in the league? Does anyone think his injury last season is career ending or he's shown to be injury prone? Bottom line guy doesnt have top 5 pontenial, he is a top 5 TE who we got in the 3rd. Final grade "A"! If he was a 1st round pick I wouldn't be giving him an A but only using a 3rd come on.

This is a better way of stating what I was trying to say. Finley does not have the potential to be outstanding, he was outstanding. Now, you can try to diminish it because he was injured, but he was consistently a stud when he was on the field. That's not potential, that's his actual play.

I just don't get the comparison the Nelson, he had several good games at the end of the year, but those games were a surprise because he'd been playing all year before that at a lower level. If he plays all year and is only so-so for sixteen of the games, why would you grade him highly based only on the last few games while discounting Finley because he only had a handful of good games because of injury? I just can't say that Nelson was a better pick even with the injuries.

[pbmax]

Injuries obviously help determine the success or failure of a club and its draft picks. But only information or injuries that can be predictive should enter the discussion about whether or not a draft was conducted successfully. Was there any indication that Finley was injury prone when he was drafted? If not and if he was clean medically, this pick cannot be argued with. And the same approach that brought him to the Packers should be employed to bring more like him, because there is a good chance he will never play as many games as the Packers would like.

To me, the only way to grade a draft is to judge whether or not the strategy optimizes the team's chance for success. I think Finley passes that test unless there were medical flags that were unheeded.

After we settle this, let's debate what MVP should really mean. I like MOP better.

[Patler]

What is really being debated, the decisions on draft day or how it has turned out? I thought it was the latter.

I think a GM can make fabulous decisions on draft day that through no fault of his own don't turn out so great.
In a down year, no team might have a draft that pans out.
A good player can be minimized due to injury.

That's why I can give TT high marks for the 2008 draft even if I think that at this point it has not panned out as well as it could have or as well as it might in the future.

[sharpe1027]

What is really being debated, the decisions on draft day or how it has turned out? I thought it was the latter.

I think a GM can make fabulous decisions on draft day that through no fault of his own don't turn out so great.
In a down year, no team might have a draft that pans out.
A good player can be minimized due to injury.

That's why I can give TT high marks for the 2008 draft even if I think that at this point it has not panned out as well as it could have or as well as it might in the future.

Maybe we just need a common standard to use. I would grade a draft by asking a simple question: looking back, would you take the player at the same position (C+ to B- grade), higher (A-B grade), lower (C-D grade) or not at all (F grade).

[gbgary]

yup...A!

[Deputy Nutz]

To answer your question yes I do give Fylnn an A because QB is the most important position in football and if we do trade him we would receive a lot more than a 7th. Same with Finley. Has he performed to his pontenial yet? Of course not but if we were to trade him we would most likely recieve a 1st. So drafting a player in the 3rd round who three years later now has first round value, I don't see how you can't label that an A. Also the factor that the word injury prone has yet to come up any where besides message boards. NFL GMs know the talent this guy has and if they were to redo that 2008 draft Finley wouldn't even around with our 1st round pick. BTW bringing up Finleys lack of blocking is like complaining that Clay Matthews is poor in pass coverage. Just like Clay is superior at pressuring the QB he's not going to be ask to drop back but a few times. Same with Finley being such a mismatch in the receiving game, you don't use a guy like that to block on the line very often.

Again you are wrong comparing Finley to Clay. Clay makes an impact both on pass plays and on running plays. He is pretty good against the run, and is a hell of a pass rusher. The Packers are not stupid, they aren't going to ask Clay to drop into coverage when he is the Packers best pass rusher, just like McCarthy isn't going to keep Finley in to pass block on passing downs, but you better believe Finley is going to be asked to block during running plays. He has only been a starter for 4 games his whole career. Lee had to start in 2009 because Finley's blocking was so piss poor. Finley has improved his blocking, I am not cracking on Finley he is ultra talented and can be a better blocking if he puts his mind to it, but I am just waiting for the comment from him about being too good of a receiver to bother with blocking.

[get louder at lambeau]

I just don't get the comparison the Nelson, he had several good games at the end of the year, but those games were a surprise because he'd been playing all year before that at a lower level. If he plays all year and is only so-so for sixteen of the games, why would you grade him highly based only on the last few games while discounting Finley because he only had a handful of good games because of injury? I just can't say that Nelson was a better pick even with the injuries.

This is a look at the draft picks after three years. After three years, Jordy has more production than Finley. Both have only had a "handful of good games," in reality, without adding in the excuses for either player. In Finley's case, it was due mostly to a slow start to his career and injuries. In Nelson's case, it was mostly because he's buried at the deepest position on the roster and has been used as a returner due to roster needs on STs and depth at WR. But those are the "reasons" or "excuses" or whatever you want to call them.

ACTUAL MEASURABLE PRODUCTION TO THIS POINT, NOT COUNTING POTENTIAL OR EXCUSES
Nelson- 122 catches, 1565 yards, 8 TDs (and 58 kick returns for 1339 yards, 23.1 avg, 17 punt returns for 90 yards, 5.3 avg)
Finley- 88 catches, 1210 yards, 7 TDs

Their average yards per catch and yards per game played are very similar.

[sharpe1027]

This is a look at the draft picks after three years. After three years, Jordy has more production than Finley. Both have only had a "handful of good games," in reality, without adding in the excuses for either player. In Finley's case, it was due mostly to a slow start to his career and injuries. In Nelson's case, it was mostly because he's buried at the deepest position on the roster and has been used as a returner due to roster needs on STs and depth at WR. But those are the "reasons" or "excuses" or whatever you want to call them.

ACTUAL MEASURABLE PRODUCTION TO THIS POINT, NOT COUNTING POTENTIAL OR EXCUSES
Nelson- 122 catches, 1565 yards, 8 TDs (and 58 kick returns for 1339 yards, 23.1 avg, 17 punt returns for 90 yards, 5.3 avg)
Finley- 88 catches, 1210 yards, 7 TDs

Their average yards per catch and yards per game played are very similar.

Nelson has never even played his way into a starting job. I personally don't think that is equivalent to an injury, but that's just a point that we can agree to disagree on.

If you could go back an re-draft, would you draft Nelson in the first round? Would you draft Finley in the second?

[Guiness]

Nelson has never even played his way into a starting job. I personally don't think that is equivalent to an injury, but that's just a point that we can agree to disagree on.

If you could go back an re-draft, would you draft Nelson in the first round? Would you draft Finley in the second?

Don't play that game. We got them where we got them, and it's worked out pretty well in both cases.

Want to go back? I want Barry Sanders instead of The Incredible Bulk.

A better question when you're looking at pasts drafts would be 'where would this player go if the draft was held again?' I think Finley would be a late first/early second, Nelson possibly the same or later in the second.

While Nelson hasn't become a star, it was a thin WR draft, and as the 3rd WR taken, he's done well. Better than one of those taken ahead of him (Devin Thomas) and I'd say there were only three clearly better WR's in the draft, and 1 or 2 that are on the same level as him.

[sharpe1027]

Don't play that game. We got them where we got them, and it's worked out pretty well in both cases.

Want to go back? I want Barry Sanders instead of The Incredible Bulk.

A better question when you're looking at pasts drafts would be 'where would this player go if the draft was held again?' I think Finley would be a late first/early second, Nelson possibly the same or later in the second.

While Nelson hasn't become a star, it was a thin WR draft, and as the 3rd WR taken, he's done well. Better than one of those taken ahead of him (Devin Thomas) and I'd say there were only three clearly better WR's in the draft, and 1 or 2 that are on the same level as him.

Isn't that what I said? I said "re-draft" and you said "the draft was held again." I don't understand what hair you are are splitting, but regardless, your analysis answers my question.

Using the standard I mentioned above, Finley could be graded as a better pick than Nelson because, in hindsight, you would have picked Finley two rounds above where he went, whereas you would have picked Nelson a below where he went.

[mraynrand]

Why do we keep saying Finley has potential?

Because people are talking two kinds of potential - his physical skill/talent potential, and his potential to produce for the team. There is no question about the first (except perhaps for blocking), but there is question about the second. There is no substitute for PRODUCTION on the field. In that area Finley is about the same as Nelson - as pointed out above. IF he suffers no further injuries, and stays with the team, I believe his production will be outstanding.

[mraynrand]

Using the standard I mentioned above, Finley could be graded as a better pick than Nelson because, in hindsight, you would have picked Finley two rounds above where he went, whereas you would have picked Nelson a below where he went.

A little quibble - Nelson has yet to prove unworthy of a top second round pick. He very well may be your #2 WR in GB for a long time to come. If so, isn't that worth a second round pick?

[sharpe1027]

The only argument I have seen that they have the same production requires me to ignore anything other than pure statistics. I don't think you can grade the draft that way.