Summary of Packer Trades

[woodbuck27]

He must not have. According to some sources, the Packers were targeting WR Stedman Bailey with the #93 pick. The Falcons traded out of #92 and the Packers lost him to the Rams.

So, no, TT was not targeting Brandon Williams.

Yup but do we really know why?

Rd. 3... 30(92) Rams (From Falcons) Bailey, Stedman WR 5'10" 193 West Virginia 79.0

Rd. 3...31(93) Dolphins (From 49ers through Packers) Davis, Will CB 5'11" 186 Utah St. 71.0

Rd.3...32(94) Ravens Williams, Brandon DT 6'1" 335 Missouri Southern St. 73.1

We ***may all agree on that one... that TT didn't or ***maybe? didn't want DT Brandon Williams...***yet this:

*** It depends where Ted Thompson's passion lies (maybe?) TT loves picks...he loves to trade down!? There's too much evidence to deny this is a fact. I deem that watering down the overall quality of his draft.

Ted Thompson and his Draft Team receives a critique of doing that and this draft from posters like myself and Wist43. We're the posters that have to toss the snowballs. We don't do this because we're really bad Packer fans ... bad boys / too men. Disloyal troublemakers / shit disturbers.

We do it because we're conscientious in terms of our observations. I don't want to make this seem as an apology for me and what I do either. If you don't like it...tuff. Deal with yourself.

We do it out of a genuine concern because now more that ever TT has to nail his drafts. The times they are a changin' and until some GM with a real set of balls says ... NO!

NO! That's right ...

No... to the ridiculous salary demands of certain position players like Aaron Rodgers and Clay Matthews. That BS will ruin the game of NFL football. The greed and that's all it is. Has to be stopped ASAP. Good for Aaron and Clay and Joe and Peyton..and Drew and Calvin and Eli...and soon Tom will be adjusted...count on it.

That whole thing turns my stomach. It's so bad I don't want to go there.

Back to thios examination:

Unless Picks at Rd. 4 #109 and Rd. 5 #146 and Rd. 7 #224 or three(3) picks were more valuable to TT than using Rd. 3 #193 to pick DT Brandon Williams or anyone else that went at Rd. 3 #93 to Rd. 4 #108. That's a total of 16 prospects.

***Eight (8) of which could be clearly classified as covering Packer priority needs.

ie Safety, OLB, OL, RB...and two decent DT's....again Brandon Williams (RAVENS) and Akeem Spence,Illinois (TITANS). Like them or not they we're on someones board and on that teams roster prior to TT making his pick in Rd. 4 Pick #109....OT David Bakhtiari.

***Those coming off the board in that group between Rd. 3 #93 and Rd. 4 #108.

GO PACKERS !

[Gunakor]

Woody, why do you assume we needed a new safety? Cause Woodson isn't here anymore? Woodson wasn't here for half of last season either, and we won a bunch of football games in his absence. I never thought we needed a safety. Certainly not as a priority. I like the kids we have back there.

We did have a need for another OLB, but not one that's going to be starting. A developmental OLB to backup Perry and Matthews is all we needed, and they got exactly that in Barrington.

Didn't need two defensive tackles. We needed one backup defensive tackle so Raji isn't on the field for every defensive snap of the season, and one starting defensive end to line up in front of Matthews. Jones and Boyd. Our DL looks good. In fact, our entire front 7 looks good. On paper at least. I'm fully expecting a truly ferocious pass rush from this group this year.

The only position TT whiffed on in this draft is center. All other truly pressing needs were addressed.

As to your comment about AR and CMIII salary demands, if you would have refused them, some other GM for some other team would have gladly paid them. AR's contract is especially team friendly, actually, since they reworked it with 2 years left on his current deal rather than at the end of it. It means they can spread out the cap hit of the new deal over 7 years rather than 5 - his actual cap hit never goes over 21 million. Rodgers' "richest contract in NFL history" is actually more team friendly than Joe Flacco's or Drew Brees' contracts. The deal they gave Rodgers was great for both parties. Read up:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ers-took-less/

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/pos...odgers-cap-hit

[Patler]

Some new proposals for trade value charts. Most have some statistical support to them.
I also posted these in the draft thread:

http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftology321.php

http://harvardsportsanalysis.wordpre...l-draft-picks/

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=527

http://www.footballperspective.com/draft-value-chart/

[Bretsky]

Woody, why do you assume we needed a new safety? Cause Woodson isn't here anymore? Woodson wasn't here for half of last season either, and we won a bunch of football games in his absence. I never thought we needed a safety. Certainly not as a priority. I like the kids we have back there.

We did have a need for another OLB, but not one that's going to be starting. A developmental OLB to backup Perry and Matthews is all we needed, and they got exactly that in Barrington.

Didn't need two defensive tackles. We needed one backup defensive tackle so Raji isn't on the field for every defensive snap of the season, and one starting defensive end to line up in front of Matthews. Jones and Boyd. Our DL looks good. In fact, our entire front 7 looks good. On paper at least. I'm fully expecting a truly ferocious pass rush from this group this year.

The only position TT whiffed on in this draft is center. All other truly pressing needs were addressed.

As to your comment about AR and CMIII salary demands, if you would have refused them, some other GM for some other team would have gladly paid them. AR's contract is especially team friendly, actually, since they reworked it with 2 years left on his current deal rather than at the end of it. It means they can spread out the cap hit of the new deal over 7 years rather than 5 - his actual cap hit never goes over 21 million. Rodgers' "richest contract in NFL history" is actually more team friendly than Joe Flacco's or Drew Brees' contracts. The deal they gave Rodgers was great for both parties. Read up:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ers-took-less/

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/pos...odgers-cap-hit

I'm on the we could have used a S wagon too........cause....Jennings kind of sux and IMO....very limited upside

[Smeefers]

I'm on the we could have used a S wagon too........cause....Jennings kind of sux and IMO....very limited upside

There's a reason he was a Undrafted Free Agent.

[woodbuck27]

I'm on the we could have used a S wagon too........cause....Jennings kind of sux and IMO....very limited upside

In a word and please excuse me as I'm so busy with stuff:

That.

OK some more...

Look at game film and how our safetys (tackle)

As I posted in another thread. Pins stand up better in a bowling alley.

Tackling is a problem on the Packers. Remember when we tackled well? When our defense was able to close fast on anyone with the ball. It's been some time since I've seen that. I know the game is always getting faster.

It came up 1-2 seasons ago. MM was concerned and said we need to tackle better.

Can that be taught? MM's need hasn't transpired in my view.

GO PACK GO !

[woodbuck27]

Woody, why do you assume we needed a new safety? Cause Woodson isn't here anymore? Woodson wasn't here for half of last season either, and we won a bunch of football games in his absence. I never thought we needed a safety. Certainly not as a priority. I like the kids we have back there.

We did have a need for another OLB, but not one that's going to be starting. A developmental OLB to backup Perry and Matthews is all we needed, and they got exactly that in Barrington.

Didn't need two defensive tackles. We needed one backup defensive tackle so Raji isn't on the field for every defensive snap of the season, and one starting defensive end to line up in front of Matthews. Jones and Boyd. Our DL looks good. In fact, our entire front 7 looks good. On paper at least. I'm fully expecting a truly ferocious pass rush from this group this year.

The only position TT whiffed on in this draft is center. All other truly pressing needs were addressed.

As to your comment about AR and CMIII salary demands, if you would have refused them, some other GM for some other team would have gladly paid them. AR's contract is especially team friendly, actually, since they reworked it with 2 years left on his current deal rather than at the end of it. It means they can spread out the cap hit of the new deal over 7 years rather than 5 - his actual cap hit never goes over 21 million. Rodgers' "richest contract in NFL history" is actually more team friendly than Joe Flacco's or Drew Brees' contracts. The deal they gave Rodgers was great for both parties. Read up:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ers-took-less/

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/pos...odgers-cap-hit

I'll come back to this maybe tomorrow AM...Have a great evening.

PACKERS !

[Smidgeon]

There's a reason he was a Undrafted Free Agent.

...and a reason they drafted Jerron "The Missile" McMillian. Go with it. I'm trying to start a nickname.

[Fritz]

McMillan's going to have a breakout year. So will Burnett.

In my opinion, of course.

[run pMc]

I'm ok if people think that TT watered down the quality of drafted players by trading down. There were a few head scratchers or "Nooooo!" moves IMO. That said, the draft is done and I am sooo over it. I'm on to hoping our picks can play and that Minny's R1 bonanza bombs. I am not a professional scout or NFL GM, so whether I agree or not, I'm willing to give TT the benefit of the doubt. Also, I think that this was a draft where a lot of the players were of pretty similar quality (i.e., the # of players at a given tier of talent was large) so it would make sense to trade down for extra picks in that tier -- it's the "having more swings at the plate" analogy. Not many R4 or R5 picks become All Stars, but you're more likely to hit on one -- or at least get serviceable starters/solid backups -- if you have more chances to pick one.

Would you rather have Lacy and Franklin, or Ball and a Safety? M.D.Jennings seemed to bounce off tackles a bit too much for my tastes at Safety, so I was (and still am) hoping there's improvement at that spot...unless they move Hyde to S it's going to have to be internal improvement. Woodson was not the answer at safety. Heaven help them if Burnett gets hurt. Maybe Richardson and McMillian can play?
FWIW, I thought getting Lacy and Franklin where they did was very good value. I think drafting 2 RBs actually increases the chances they hit on at least one...people are split on Ball and who knows if a R4 safety would crack the game day roster. (Yes, I realize McMillian was a R4 pick last year.)

I don't know a thing about Brandon Williams, but it seems like we already have a couple of guys who are 6-1 330 on our team (Pickett, Raji). Boyd can play interior DL and did so in the SEC, so I think TT did ok there. I remember people were up in arms about TT picking Mike Neal over Alex Carrington, who's not exactly lighting the world on fire over in BUF (4 sacks 29 tackles in 4 year career, compared to 5.5Sk/17 tk for Neal). Let's wait a few years before we crucify the draft choices.