IS IT TIME TO PUT UNTOUCHABLE TED ON TRIAL ? HOW DO YOU GRADE HIM ??

[Zool]

What's not clear? The criteria for a good draft has been laid out in the post. It derives from the Ron Wolfe judgement of a draft, where three starters is the sign of a successful draft. Based on that metric as a good draft, he average draft since 2012 has been slightly above average, where average is half-way between really bad and really good.

I think I’ve made myself clear enough. Calling a draft average without co paring it to any other teams in the NFL is not a ranking system. Calling a player good, bad, or average is your personal opinion not a fact.

[Bretsky]

I'll say this right out. Bach deserved Pro Bowl Status. Rodgers, Devante, and Bach are centers of teams

We have none on defense. You can praise TT for the offense, and you can shred him for he defense.

NFL Championships.....wonder if the untouchable one will ever go beyond Fart in the Wind Status

[Zool]

I think next year we’ll be saying the same about Clark and Williams.

And Randall (/ducks)

[Bretsky]

You’re either drunk or didn’t figure out I was talking about Partials arbitrary grading system for each pick/draft. Or both.

lol

I thought you were drunk and mistaking Partials Detailed effort for mine

I'm one of the many that shares opinions w/o collecting much date to support anything I say....lol

[Bretsky]

I think I’ve made myself clear enough. Calling a draft average without co paring it to any other teams in the NFL is not a ranking system. Calling a player good, bad, or average is your personal opinion not a fact.

To his credit, Partial made way more effort in here than anybody else.

I'd love for somebody to map out a 5 year comparison if the acquisitions...both draft and free agency...of teams that are drafting around GB. Pittsburg would seem to be the obvious choice. You might bring in NE as well.

But they both utilized free agency more than Green Bay......which.....makes it more important TT not f'ck up with draft and develop and let stars walk out of the house

[Bretsky]

I think next year we’ll be saying the same about Clark and Williams.

And Randall (/ducks)

You think Michael Clark is going to be an above average player?

Williams might develop into an average starter; honestly to me Jones shows more

Randall is probably the most talented player in our secondary; he will develop if he keeps his head out of his ass

[call_me_ishmael]

I think I’ve made myself clear enough. Calling a draft average without co paring it to any other teams in the NFL is not a ranking system. Calling a player good, bad, or average is your personal opinion not a fact.

What does comparing one Packers draft to another Packers draft have to do with any other team?? I understand what you think this should be, but that's not what it is nor what it was intended to be.

There is no metric to determine whether a player is good, bad or average. It's always subjective. What's your point? These are *my* rankings. If they were Mike Mayock's or TT rankings, they'd still be subjective.

I am not really seeing your point here. There are way too many variables to compare one team's draft to another, so why not compare historical trends for the same team? That's what this is.

[Zool]

Was Lawrence Guy a bad pick? Was Franklin? Was Terrance Murphy? Brad Jones made 36 starts for the Packers. Was he a good pick?

How many starts does a player have to make to be considered a good pick and over how many years does he have to make those starts? Do they have to be starts for the Packers?

If a team drafts 1 slot after the Packers and gets 5 career long starters, and the Packers get 3 starters from the same draft who only start 1 season each, is that a good or bad draft?

Do you include UDFA in your analysis?

[Zool]

You think Michael Clark is going to be an above average player?

Williams might develop into an average starter; honestly to me Jones shows more

Randall is probably the most talented player in our secondary; he will develop if he keeps his head out of his ass

Kenny not Michael. Jones will be forever a tease who’s always dinged up.

[Bretsky]

Was Lawrence Guy a bad pick? Was Franklin? Was Terrance Murphy? Brad Jones made 36 starts for the Packers. Was he a good pick?

How many starts does a player have to make to be considered a good pick and over how many years does he have to make those starts? Do they have to be starts for the Packers?

If a team drafts 1 slot after the Packers and gets 5 career long starters, and the Packers get 3 starters from the same draft who only start 1 season each, is that a good or bad draft?

Do you include UDFA in your analysis?

Come on Man

He gave his criteria, which went back about 5 or 6 years.

Lawrence Guy; is he within the timeframe ? Ted gets credit for drafting him but more importantly it looks like he made he mistake of cutting him.

Is Terrance Murphy or Franklyn within the timeframe ? Murphy seems forever back

UDFA; why would you include those ? Everybody knows that is a recruiting binge and whoever recruits the best gets there guy. It's not like Ted found any of these guys when others didn't know about them. Does Ted even recruit these guys or do others ? Most teams hit or miss on a few of those. Occasionally we hit bigger. But Sam Shields was being pursued by MANY teams. Why would you pull in UDFA when they are really not expected to make a team. Are thy superstars if they just don't get cut ? It was smart to leave them off

[Bretsky]

Kenny not Michael. Jones will be forever a tease who’s always dinged up.

oops; agree. Someday Kenny has a great chance to be on that list but he's not here yet. Daniels may be our best defensive player currently. We could all argue about it since currently our defense really doesn't have a star. Hopefully they develop....or get drafted this year.

[Zool]

Come on Man

He gave his criteria, which went back about 5 or 6 years.

Lawrence Guy; is he within the timeframe ? Ted gets credit for drafting him but more importantly it looks like he made he mistake of cutting him.

Is Terrance Murphy or Franklyn within the timeframe ? Murphy seems forever back

UDFA; why would you include those ? Everybody knows that is a recruiting binge and whoever recruits the best gets there guy. It's not like Ted found any of these guys when others didn't know about them. Does Ted even recruit these guys or do others ? Most teams hit or miss on a few of those. Occasionally we hit bigger. But Sam Shields was being pursued by MANY teams. Why would you pull in UDFA when they are really not expected to make a team. Are thy superstars if they just don't get cut ? It was smart to leave them off

The off topic convo was about grading drafts to fill out the poll. I asked simple questions in regards to how the good average bad was chosen. Apparently it means starter or not starter. So I asked these as follow ups.

I’m not saying where I think Thompson falls in so far as his ability to do his job. I guess I’ll say that enough other teams have commented on how good he is at his job and take their opinion.

And yes if you’re grading a GM based off his ability to acquire talent, you have to take UDFA into account. Otherwise, the already skewed data set is skewed even farther to attempt to prove the original point.

BTW, Frank Zombo has started 20 games over the last 2 years. UDFA.

[ThunderDan]

No all pro and pro bowl selections are not simply a popularity contest. That's absurd. Its not like the NBA where MJ and Kobe were all star starters at 40. I like how you parsed this part and ignored the part that shreds your "no difference makers left when the packers pick" narrative. I'm not so blind to say that all of the packers success is due to Aaron . But damn sure I'll contend that the majority is. We have a big enough sample size without him. A listless, slow, unexplosive team with pedestrian talent. TT built a balanced team 5-7 years ago. But honestly minus Davante, Bahktiari, and Rodgers and I could take or leave the rest of this squad we have now.

Except Jeff Saturday was a Pro Bowl starter his year in GB when we benched him for terrible play.

I’ll agree that All-Pro has meaning.

[mraynrand]

Take a peak at the 2016 Pro Bowl rosters. Then take a look at the players selected to the 2016 pro bowl but didn't play. You could field a better roster from the 'didn't plays' than you can from the 2 rosters that faced off. When more than 100 players make the pro bowl, it loses quite a bit of its meaning. Popularity contest might not be the best comparison, but making the pro bowl isn't what it used to be.

I just think it's a terrible way to measure GM success. It would be absolute bottom of my criteria. Bottom line for me is actual performance success - wins and loses regular season and post season. In that regard, TT has been exemplary - top 5 among his peers. It is indisputable.

[mraynrand]

In 2011, when Manning went down for the Colts, and they went 2-14, they had the following Pro Bowlers on their team:


Reggie Wayne
Jeff Saturday
Dallas Clark
Joseph Addai
Dwight Freeney
Robert Mathis
Antoine Bethea
Adam Vinatieri
Pat McAfree
Kerry Collins

They also had:
Pierre Garcon

Those guys were worth two wins. But they won some popularity contests.