Vic Ketchmab calls a spade a spade with fans who live in fantasy

[Cheesehead Craig]

My replacement cyborg body and mind transference device beg to differ. However, given current laws, we won't be able to settle the bet until CY-pbmax posts in the 2030s.

Why am I picturing the scene from Weird Science with the guys wearing bras on their heads?

[pbmax]

Why am I picturing the scene from Weird Science with the guys wearing bras on their heads?

Rumors started by jealous competitors. CY-pbmax is gendered male. Currently unsure if transference has any effect on sexual preference.

[3irty1]

JH, nobody wants to see TT sign someone like a Jairus Byrd to stupid guaranteed money and get hamstrung by his injuries or pedestrian play. On the opposite side, all of your depth does not have to be college free agents. There are free agents that a GM can sprinkle on to their roster that will provide veteran depth and not a ton of guaranteed money. I think some fans would just like our GM to consider more players like this. They may not be an all-pro because those guys are getting a lot of guaranteed money, but they aren't necessarily green horns either. I do think it makes a difference when you sign a guy like that too.

I think there is a camp of people who appreciate what TT does and how he thinks ahead in terms of having a long-game for the salary cap and who the team wants to retain and how they will fit under the cap down the road. I'm sure there are a lot of moving pieces there. However, what we are learning from Jared Cook is that he can still play and the team has gotten a nice look at him. I think there may be other under-valued gems like this that can help in the short-term while having a chance to prove a more long-term worth to the team. If that takes a roster spot from a college free agent, well, a number of them churn and burn the bottom of the roster every year anyway.

I'll call BS on this. Nobody wants the outcome of Jairus Byrd, but opening day of free agency this is exactly what the #neverTT crowd is howling for. A big cap casualty star from another team. When Ted grabs an unknown journeyman or a cut player like Peppers/Cook it seemingly does nothing to temper the tightwad ted criticism.

The very idea that Cook, a guy Ted signed and who proved to be under-valued, is indicative that there are even more under-valued gems to be discovered is based in what exactly? The value of any player is based on the interest of 32 GMs. To land an under-valued player at all you need to out perform other GMs. To speculate that there is a significant pool of Jared Cook level veteran difference makers that represent great value and a good fit seems like a fantasy but even given that such a pool exists to expect Ted to collect these under-valued veterans is to ask him to outperform all other GMs with regards to each one of them.

I think there is a form of mistaking correlation for causation here. Ted's infrequent attempts but consistent success in free agency does not mean free agents by nature are successful and this could be scaled up with more attempts. A criticism to be taken seriously would be one that dealt with opportunity costs. For instance an example of resigning of his own free agent who would have been better to cut loose in favor of another specific free agent.

[pbmax]

^ There is also the fact that no one remembers run of the mill FA busts. Except the ones Ted has signed (RIP Manuel, Chillar)

So everyone arguing for MORE of this only sees playoff teams with FAs contributing and wants more because Ted doesn't do it enough. No one looks at the rate of success for each of those teams with their signees or draft picks.


*Don't forget LeTroy Guion, who also doesn't count since he was a street free agent.

[Smidgeon]

I'll call BS on this. Nobody wants the outcome of Jairus Byrd, but opening day of free agency this is exactly what the #neverTT crowd is howling for. A big cap casualty star from another team. When Ted grabs an unknown journeyman or a cut player like Peppers/Cook it seemingly does nothing to temper the tightwad ted criticism.

The very idea that Cook, a guy Ted signed and who proved to be under-valued, is indicative that there are even more under-valued gems to be discovered is based in what exactly? The value of any player is based on the interest of 32 GMs. To land an under-valued player at all you need to out perform other GMs. To speculate that there is a significant pool of Jared Cook level veteran difference makers that represent great value and a good fit seems like a fantasy but even given that such a pool exists to expect Ted to collect these under-valued veterans is to ask him to outperform all other GMs with regards to each one of them.

I think there is a form of mistaking correlation for causation here. Ted's infrequent attempts but consistent success in free agency does not mean free agents by nature are successful and this could be scaled up with more attempts. A criticism to be taken seriously would be one that dealt with opportunity costs. For instance an example of resigning of his own free agent who would have been better to cut loose in favor of another specific free agent.

The is the most basic of premise when it comes to game theory as applied to auction scenarios. You identify how much an asset means to you. If you win the auction it means one thing: you valued the asset more than anyone else at the table. It also implies that because you won the asset, you overvalued it on average. Obviously that's the premise, but the asset can have a higher value than everyone anticipated---such as Cook with Rodgers throwing to him.

[pbmax]

The is the most basic of premise when it comes to game theory as applied to auction scenarios. You identify how much an asset means to you. If you win the auction it means one thing: you valued the asset more than anyone else at the table. It also implies that because you won the asset, you overvalued it on average. Obviously that's the premise, but the asset can have a higher value than everyone anticipated---such as Cook with Rodgers throwing to him.

In Cook's case he wanted to sign with an established QB and Rodgers was high on his list. So he helped limit the number of available bidders.

[vince]

I suspect Tex is thinking about the 2013 team that unexpectedly went belly up when Rodgers broke his collar bone. But McGinn jinxed that team by predicting preseason that it would hold up just fine if the unthinkable were to happen and Rodgers go down. He knows better than to do that with this team. Rather than talk about the roster as a whole, let's look at position units.

OL: clearly one of the best if not the best in pass blocking, and certainly at least adequate as run blockers. Check.
WR: much improved from a year ago thanks to return of Nelson, maturation of Adams and late season return to health of Cook. I would say that this unit is at least above average.
RB: with a healthy Lacy this still would have been a position without much depth because of Starks's sudden decline. Montgomery and Ripkowski are at least serviceable as running options, and the struggle to find a running back after Lacy went down had the salutary effect of forcing McCarthy to redesign the passing game in a way that continues to pay benefits.

DL: One productive vet (Daniels), another serviceable vet (Guion) and two rookies who show potential. The unit doesn't have good depth but they have four guys who can at least contribute something.
OLB: Two good starters and a bunch of projects. Depth is not a strength.
ILB: Two serviceable young starters, one decent sub and a strong safety. Depth is mediocre.
Secondary: When Shields went down and Randall and Rollins got hurt or regressed, Capers invented the amoeba defense starring Micah Hyde and a bunch of F.D. safeties nobody's ever heard of.
Special teams: the patience that TT showed with Crosby looks brilliant now, and Schum has been a pleasant surprise as punter and holder. (Has anyone noticed a single bad hold this year?)

Overall the talent level and depth of this team seem to be better than average.

1. You forgot one pretty important position.
2. If you objectively assess the depth and level of talent in similar fashion of all other teams in the league throughout their respective rosters and compare them to one another, I'm very confident "better than average" looks like a serious understatement.

[Upnorth]

Rumors started by jealous competitors. CY-pbmax is gendered male. Currently unsure if transference has any effect on sexual preference.

The bra's are an important part of the science. If you want male cyborg i believe you need a jock strap on your head and to think about hot guys, your call.

[texaspackerbacker]

1. You forgot one pretty important position.
2. If you objectively assess the depth and level of talent in similar fashion of all other teams in the league throughout their respective rosters and compare them to one another, I'm very confident "better than average" looks like a serious understatement.

Try serious overstatement.

[Upnorth]

I think Ted won free agency big time in 2015 year, and then snagged another in 2016. I count 2 probowl level talents in 2015 and one in 2016. Cobb, buluga and cook.


Er, wait, resigning your own free agents doesn't count, right?

Anyone can find fault if you look hard, but admiting your reaching because of a predetermined opinion is much harder to admit I guess.

One weakness I think Ted does have in player evaluation is pre existing injuries and their impact on a players future potential. From early on with Harrell to recently with Shields and concussion, he has made a few mistakes in this area.

[Upnorth]

Try serious overstatement.

My take on our positional ranking right now (after injuries) vrs the league for the season. This will handicap teds work as we are pretty beat up in a few areas.
QB - top 5
OL - top 5
Rb - top 15
WR - top 10
TE - Top 10
DL - top 15
ILB - top 25
OLB top 20
CB- Top 30 (maybe)
S - top 10 (assuming burnett plays, top 20 if not)
K- top 5
P - top 20
KR- top 15
PR - top 15
Gunner - Top 20

So out of the ten main position groupings, after injuries, we have 6 above average, 4 below average. My rankings are a combuination of who would I rather have and Football outsiders and pro football focus rankings.
To me, this means we are at the least, after injuries, still above average.

[Smeefers]

My favorite part about this discussion is the Aaron Rodgers angle. Some believe that Ted Thompson would act the exact same way if we did not have Aaron Rodgers. Do you really believe we'd have exactly this team, except Alex Smith would be our QB? Do you believe our coaches would call the same plays? Do you think we would prepare the same way?

There is no doubt that this team is built completely around Aaron Rodgers. Not only that, it's built around him playing at ridiculous levels.

We've been in the play offs the last 9 years. That in and of itself is success. Winning a super bowl is not something that anyone deserves. It's not something one player would make a difference on. The Patriots went 16-0 and still lost the thing. The Packers went 15-1 and got kicked out of the second round. Things like this happens to all but 1 team every year. Does that mean that there are 31 failures every year? Should 31 coaches be fired? Should 31 personnel guys be kicked because they didn't pick up that mysterious stranger who would of made the difference?

Do you know who won us the super bowl? Jarrett Bush. Let that sink in fellas.

Remember the San Diego Super Chargers and what has become of them since they decided Marty Schottenhiemer couldn't get them over the hump. We would become the laughing stock of the league if we dumped TT and MM. Exactly who do you think would be a replacement that was better? What coach out there has gotten his team to the play offs for nearly a decade straight?

Alright, I'm going back to lurking. Later.

[vince]

NFL Power Rankings 2016: Examining Super Bowl Favorites Following Preseason Packers #3

Preseason Power Rankings Packers #4

PFF: Ranking the rosters of all 32 NFL teams - 2016 Packers #2

Ranking the rosters of all 32 NFL teams - 2015 Packers #2

Ranking the rosters of all 32 NFL teams - 2014 Packers #8

NFL Power Rankings 2016: Early look at where teams stand as OTAs begin Packers #8

NFL's most talented teams - 2015 Packers #8

Ranking the Top 10 Most Talented Rosters in the NFL Packers #6

Walter Football: NFL Power Rankings Packers #1


Ranking the 10 LEAST Talented Rosters in the NFL Packers - conspicuously absent

[vince]

My favorite part about this discussion is the Aaron Rodgers angle. Some believe that Ted Thompson would act the exact same way if we did not have Aaron Rodgers. Do you really believe we'd have exactly this team, except Alex Smith would be our QB? Do you believe our coaches would call the same plays? Do you think we would prepare the same way?

There is no doubt that this team is built completely around Aaron Rodgers. Not only that, it's built around him playing at ridiculous levels.

We've been in the play offs the last 9 years. That in and of itself is success. Winning a super bowl is not something that anyone deserves. It's not something one player would make a difference on. The Patriots went 16-0 and still lost the thing. The Packers went 15-1 and got kicked out of the second round. Things like this happens to all but 1 team every year. Does that mean that there are 31 failures every year? Should 31 coaches be fired? Should 31 personnel guys be kicked because they didn't pick up that mysterious stranger who would of made the difference?

Do you know who won us the super bowl? Jarrett Bush. Let that sink in fellas.

Remember the San Diego Super Chargers and what has become of them since they decided Marty Schottenhiemer couldn't get them over the hump. We would become the laughing stock of the league if we dumped TT and MM. Exactly who do you think would be a replacement that was better? What coach out there has gotten his team to the play offs for nearly a decade straight?

Alright, I'm going back to lurking. Later.

Smeef for Pres. Just changing spots in the draft makes a huge difference. Guys like Ryan Shazier, C.J. Mosely and a whole bunch of other completely unknowable guys would be Packers if they drafted in different order each year. Who knows? The one thing we do know is that the team would look almost completely different had Thompson not drafted Rodgers. Hell, the whole Favre scenario gets turned completely upside-down.

Now we're entering twilight zone territory with irrelevant hypothetical speculation...

[hoosier]

1. You forgot one pretty important position.
2. If you objectively assess the depth and level of talent in similar fashion of all other teams in the league throughout their respective rosters and compare them to one another, I'm very confident "better than average" looks like a serious understatement.

I left that one position out because I figured the real disagreement is about whether Teddy has done "enough" in building a supporting roster, building around ARod. I don't follow other teams enough to know who's on what roster and whether or not they're any good. I can tell you that Seattle has a great secondary when healthy but had no idea whether or not anyone is prepared to step in if Thomas were to break his leg.