One Exec "Packers Have Much Work To Do"

[Scott Campbell]

lol... got a chuckle out of that; havin' surgery tomorrow, so laughing is good

Good luck tomorrow.

[wist43]

Wist, are you basing your entire analysis of TT's supposed ego/refusal to admit mistakes upon last year's draft? TT has drafted equal numbers of defense and offense and he has used his higher picks more often for defensive players. The argument used to be that he would never trade up, of course, he did exactly that to get Matthews. This new argument about not valuing defense is all smoke and mirrors. If he drafted defensive players last draft, there would probably be other holes in the roster that you would be complaining about.

You can fault him for drafting defensive players that didn't pan out, but I don't buy an argument that he ignores the defense because he thinks it is fine.

IMO, if you draft for your defensive front because you need it, rather than because there are good players available, you lose out in the long run.

I'm not saying reach for players based on need - I'm willing to go along with TT's board; where need is addressed is in how you move up or down to get the appropriate value for what you're giving up.

To that end, since we are an offensive juggernaut, fix the defense and let's get on with it. Trying to justify an entire draft of BPA that completely ignores need is borderline obtuse.

As for valuing offense and defense equally in the draft... that doesn't add up. The Packers clearly target offensive players over defensive players early in the draft, i.e. rounds 1-4. Yes TT has taken 4 defensive players in the 1st round (Harrell, Hawk, Raji, and Matthews) in his seven drafts; after that, the Packers go back to what they do best - offense.

The count in rds 1-4 are 18 offense - 15 defense (with 8 of those going to the front 7). Of those 8, 2.5 can play (Raji, Matthews, Hawk), the rest are gone.

On the flip side of that here is what the 6th and 7th rounds look like.

10 offense - 13 defense (with fully 10 front 7 players in these last 2 rounds).

Now one might say "so what"?? Throwing spitballs against the wall in the 6th/7th rounds is a numbers game - I agree. The problem however is when you look at our roster - as I pointed out before, way too many spitballs.

Defensive Line
BJ Raji (1st round)
Ryan Pickett (1st round/FA)
Jarius Wynn (6th round)
CJ Wilson (7th round)
Lawrence Guy (7th round)
Daniel Muir (Street FA)
Anthony Hargrove (orig. 3rd round, street FA)
Mike Neal (2nd round - probable bust)

Linebackers
Clay Matthews (1st round)
A.J. Hawk (1st round)
Desmond Bishop (6th round)
Brad Jones (7th round)
D.J. Smith (6th round)
Erik Walden (6th round – is a free agent)
Robert Francois (undrafted)
Frank Zombo (undrafted)
Vic So ‘oto (undrafted)
Jamari Lattimore (undrafted)

Raji and Matthews are hits on investment; Hawk is average-to-below average and wasn't worth his draft status; and the rest are 6th/7th round spitballs. Pickett is good, Bishop is average... the rest need to be replaced.

Everyone of them was a 6th round spitball, or a 7th round spitball, or a street FA spitball... I want fewer spitballs, and more quality.

[Zool]

I'd like to see a team by team analysis for the last 5 years on defensive drafting before I'll worry about anything here.

[wist43]

Well, maybe you and woodbuck are not having a parting of the way on this topic after all.

Winning the '10 SB was nothing short of stars aligning. ARod went into "beast mode"; the secondary played lights out; and teams hadn't caught up to Capers' 'Raji-10' defense yet... plus of course we still had Jenkins. His value, now that he's gone, should be obvious to everyone.

It's true I'm a front seven guy every draft, but that's b/c rushing the passer and stopping the run are how you play defense. If you discount your front seven, or play spitball cute with it the way Ted does, your defense will surely suffer, and will definitely cost you championships - assuming your offense is championship calibur; which, of course, GB's is.

We do have history to draw upon... Ted's early front seven picks are 2.5 for 8 (really 2 for 8, b/c even though Hawk is an NFL calibur player, he certainly wasn't worth the 5th pick - or a 1st round pick at all for that matter)... after that?? we have a burlap sack full of 6th/7th rounders and street FA's.

We'll have a chance just about every year with Rodgers at QB. If Ted can get the defense up to average we can contend for a championship. If not?? we'll get stomped in the playoffs by the likes of a more complete, more physically dominant team like the Giants.

6 sacks in the last 7 games?? That one sentence alone should be enough to rest the prosecutions case.

[mraynrand]

If you discount your front seven, or play spitball cute with it the way Ted does, your defense will surely suffer, and will definitely cost you championships

WTF? Did you not read what has been written above? Anyway, good luck with the surgery. Just don't share your front seven theory with your doc - If you do, I'm betting s/he will give you a nasty scar.

[Cheesehead Craig]

So I decided to check on how another 3-4 team built their defense, one that was pretty good and where those guys were drafted: The Baltimore Ravens.

So of their current DL, they have a 1st (Ngata), a 2nd (Cody), 2 5th round picks and an UFA.

Their LB corps is 2 1sts, 2 2nds (Kindle-rookie didn't play, and Kruger who is a part time player), a 5th and 7 UDFAs.

On the Steelers, 2 of their better players weren't highly taken - James Harrison (UFA) and Brett Kiesel (7th round)

I guess my point is that even the great defenses aren't built completely on high draft picks and that GMs have to take gambles on players as UDFA or late round picks and hope they pan out. One can't simply go off of when they were selected as the sole means of evaluating the GM at how he's building the position.

Oh and Mraynrad, is that Gary Spivey as your avatar?

[wist43]

WTF? Did you not read what has been written above? Anyway, good luck with the surgery. Just don't share your front seven theory with your doc - If you do, I'm betting s/he will give you a nasty scar.

Not a "theory" - our front seven is what it is - crap.

As I said, "6 sacks in the last 7 games?? That one sentence alone should be enough to rest the prosecutions case".

I win

P.S. What is the world record for number of pre-op calls from doctors, clinics, nurses, and insurance nazi's?? 2 more hours b/4 close of business - I've got to be closing in on the record, lol...

[Scott Campbell]

Oh and Mraynrad, is that Gary Spivey as your avatar?

Good eye.

That is indeed his Psychotic Advisor, Gary Spivey.

[mraynrand]

Not a "theory" - our front seven is what it is - crap.

As I said, "6 sacks in the last 7 games?? That one sentence alone should be enough to rest the prosecutions case".

I win

I guess you win - but i have no idea who you beat, because NO ONE was arguing that the front seven was good last season, were they? And that wasn't your original argument. Holy crap.

[George Cumby]

Winning the '10 SB was nothing short of stars aligning. ARod went into "beast mode"; the secondary played lights out; and teams hadn't caught up to Capers' 'Raji-10' defense yet... plus of course we still had Jenkins. His value, now that he's gone, should be obvious to everyone.

It's true I'm a front seven guy every draft, but that's b/c rushing the passer and stopping the run are how you play defense. If you discount your front seven, or play spitball cute with it the way Ted does, your defense will surely suffer, and will definitely cost you championships - assuming your offense is championship calibur; which, of course, GB's is.

We do have history to draw upon... Ted's early front seven picks are 2.5 for 8 (really 2 for 8, b/c even though Hawk is an NFL calibur player, he certainly wasn't worth the 5th pick - or a 1st round pick at all for that matter)... after that?? we have a burlap sack full of 6th/7th rounders and street FA's.

We'll have a chance just about every year with Rodgers at QB. If Ted can get the defense up to average we can contend for a championship. If not?? we'll get stomped in the playoffs by the likes of a more complete, more physically dominant team like the Giants.

6 sacks in the last 7 games?? That one sentence alone should be enough to rest the prosecutions case.

This, I have to say, is bullshit. The Packers had to win out the last two games, went on the road through the playoffs and then beat a physical Pittsburgh team. You could say the same thing about the G-men their last two SB wins and I would say the same thing. Bullshit. The Giants fucking earned their rings.

[wist43]

So I decided to check on how another 3-4 team built their defense, one that was pretty good and where those guys were drafted: The Baltimore Ravens.

So of their current DL, they have a 1st (Ngata), a 2nd (Cody), 2 5th round picks and an UFA.

Their LB corps is 2 1sts, 2 2nds (Kindle-rookie didn't play, and Kruger who is a part time player), a 5th and 7 UDFAs.

On the Steelers, 2 of their better players weren't highly taken - James Harrison (UFA) and Brett Kiesel (7th round)

I guess my point is that even the great defenses aren't built completely on high draft picks and that GMs have to take gambles on players as UDFA or late round picks and hope they pan out. One can't simply go off of when they were selected as the sole means of evaluating the GM at how he's building the position.

Oh and Mraynrad, is that Gary Spivey as your avatar?

Of course every position group is built in several ways... spitball picks, developmental mid-round picks, high picks, UFA's, street FA's, and trades.

TT has signed 1 UFA (Pickett - I don't count Hargrove and Muir b/c they are just more junk); he has invested 5 high picks (3 were/are busts); and the rest are all spitball picks. That's it. That's TT's 7 year defensive front seven roll call.

Given 7 years of evidence, I am completely ready to throw in the towel for hoping that TT and Packers will suddenly figure out how to evaluate and draft front seven players.

We're much better off drafting Jordy Nelson or Greg Jennings in the 2nd round than Mike Neal. If TT is going to miss far more often by attempting to do something the organization is obviously deficient at, i.e. drafting defense early, then I'd much rather overload at WR or somewhere else on offense with good players, than to flail around drafting busts on defense with early picks.

Given how bad the Packers are at evaluating front seven players... maybe the spitball approach is the way to go - minimize the damage of missing on higher picks.

I guess that means I'm coming around to your guys way of thinking - "we don't need no stinking front seven players!!!" As long as our K attempts 78 XP's, we're fine.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I guess that means I'm coming around to your guys way of thinking - "we don't need no stinking front seven players!!!" As long as our K attempts 78 XP's, we're fine.

Now was that so hard? Hope all goes well on the surgery.

[wist43]

This, I have to say, is bullshit. The Packers had to win out the last two games, went on the road through the playoffs and then beat a physical Pittsburgh team. You could say the same thing about the G-men their last two SB wins and I would say the same thing. Bullshit. The Giants fucking earned their rings.

No idea what you're talking about... I don't care that we overachieved to get a ring. I'll take it... we earned the ring, same as the Giants. We lost 1 player from the front seven, and everyone else returned back to earth... hence, an embarrassing 37-20 asskicking by the Giants.

I think the team that lost 37-20 to the Giants is a more accurate measure of what the Packers are as opposed to a dominant, championship calibur team. We got lucky in '10.

To be sure we have a championship calibur offense, but our defense is just pathetic. I don't know how anyone can conclude anything else... did you watch the games last year?? Good grief, I'm sorry, but the Packers 2011 defense was nothing short of laughable.

[wist43]

Now was that so hard? Hope all goes well on the surgery.

lol, thanks...

[pbmax]

Good luck wist on the surgery. Make sure you read this link before any anesthetic. Because it will make you nauseous, esp. the last paragraph.

http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/corp/page/04%2F22%2F12_DL:_Deep_in_the_middle/601?feed=2