Packers 2nd Youngest Team in the League

[MJZiggy]

Lol, MadScientist, you just agreed with the king...read his post again.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Thompson has done much better in the first round than Wolf, but I think the point some are trying to make is that most of Thompson's stars have come late in the first round (Rodgers, Matthews, Bulaga) or even after the first round (Jennings, Sitton, Bishop, Collins, Williams, Finley). So, why would it be more difficult for Thompson to find stars in the draft in the range that he's been drafting them already? Raji is the only star top 20 pick he's had. Hawk is solid. Harrell was a bust.

[pbmax]

Thompson has done much better in the first round than Wolf, but I think the point some are trying to make is that most of Thompson's stars have come late in the first round (Rodgers, Matthews, Bulaga) or even after the first round (Jennings, Sitton, Bishop, Collins, Williams, Finley). So, why would it be more difficult for Thompson to find stars in the draft in the range that he's been drafting them already? Raji is the only star top 20 pick he's had. Hawk is solid. Harrell was a bust.

Small sample size. And let's hope it stays that way.

[Smidgeon]

I'd like to see a breakdown by age for teams starters. I bet the packers are somewhere in the middle of the pack. It doesn't matter that much whether the backups are young or old. A lot of the rookies at back of roster end up getting cut in following year.

I think it does matter if the backups are young rather than old if the ability level is the same. An older player will have an established ceiling and will likely be a career backup whereas a younger backup may not have hit their ceiling yet and might turn into a serviceable or better starter. I think that's where the value of having a young team (with talent) comes in. It isn't for this year. That's where the average age of the starters comes in. It's for next year. And the year after...

[rbaloha1]

Small sample size. And let's hope it stays that way.

15 players on IR in 2010 and winning a super bowl is big enough sample size to determine TT shall continue to find the correct players to maintain Packer Super Bowl expectations.

[pbmax]

15 players on IR in 2010 and winning a super bowl is big enough sample size to determine TT shall continue to find the correct players to maintain Packer Super Bowl expectations.

That is a fantastic assertion, I hope its true.

However, the guidelines in Harv's question were picks under #20 in the first round. Thompson has had three in seven drafts. Small sample size is the likeliest reason only one of three have been sure fire All Pro.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

Statistics 101. It's all about the sample size baby!

[Fritz]

Lions )-line is old; J. Backus, the left tackle, played Mr. Howell on Gilligan's Island.

And the kicker is old, too, yes. They're in an odd spot - they're seen as an up-and-coming team which we associate with young teams - but they're not that young, at least on average.

[Fritz]

Statistics 101. It's all about the sample size baby!

Hey, hey, watch it here, people, or this thread will end up in the GC.

Questioning Ted's sample size, saying it's too small. This is a football board, darn it!

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think it does matter if the backups are young rather than old if the ability level is the same. An older player will have an established ceiling and will likely be a career backup whereas a younger backup may not have hit their ceiling yet and might turn into a serviceable or better starter. I think that's where the value of having a young team (with talent) comes in. It isn't for this year. That's where the average age of the starters comes in. It's for next year. And the year after...

I get the TT way. I was just commenting on why it is somewhat deceptive to call GB a young team. The starters are seasoned. And less obvious, those young guys at the end of the roster are being turned-over at a very high rate. Most will not be with the team in a couple year. Their primary advantage is that they are high energy and cheap. In that sense, it doesn't matter so much whether they are 23-year-old temps or 30-year-old temps.

Uhhh, I don't think I will be submiting this post to the local paper for publication, its a pretty scant point.