PETER KING FROM SI-"THE FIRST ROUNDS GOOD,BAD, AND UGLY

[retailguy]

Unless I misheard Shannahan I do not think that is completely accurate.

Shannahan stated he wanted one of three DL. When the second one came off the board he knew he had to go up after Green Bay picked. So our guy was one of three he wanted. The other must have went a bit before. I don't think he stated that he liked either one better.

But you are right; I still feel we'd have been much better off with Meachem and a 2nd than the guy we have.

Anyone ever tell you that you are stubborn? How dare you question then King. He knows best, just ask him.

Hell, those kids who booed him have already been stripped of their positions in the kingdom and put on the "blacklist" for tickets...

You have a special fate awaiting you, that signature will be burned into your ass....

[Bretsky]

I just can't wait to see the defense. I'm a defense guy. As I've watched football over the years I've slowly moved toward defense as the #1 priority.

I know you guys wanted a WR but I think Driver and Jennings can do a good job and the #3, 4 and 5 of Krob, Jones and Hollidy/Martin don't bother me at all. Nobody has 5 starters. We have 2 starters and some guys who can play behind them. If a top notch player was there I would have been extatic but as it stands Thompson felt the DT was the most impactfull football player on the board.

DT's can be difference makers. Saving 7 points is just as good as scoring 7.

I think RG has the best arguement against the Packers right now. He believes it's the Oline and I completely agree. That is the unit taht will make or break the offense right now.

The inconsistency of the OL does really hurt. But I have always and still think we need three starting calibur WR's. I don't think they are on the roster.

[run pMc]

Generally, I like Peter King's stuff, but from what I've read his personnel evaluations aren't any better than mine. Plus, he's going purely on drafting for need, which I think will get a team in trouble. Yes, I'm a BPA proponent, but I also think the team needs will shape who you take when the BPA comparisons between 2 or 5 players are essentially even. There were WR's in round 2 available, and no RB's left that were worthy of a 1st round pick, so I'm not too upset about going with D. And if Greg Olson can't block, he would have never seen the field for GB. A TE who can't block at the college level is going to struggle big-time to learn how at the pro level. I do wish that GB would have traded down a few spots to pick up another Day 1 pick...although it sure sounds like DEN would've taken this guy if he was there when they were on the clock.

The only 1st round DL pick on the GB roster is Pickett -- and STL drafted him, so that tells you something about the athleticism on the DL. I don't think DL was a strength, but it wasn't a glaring weakness either. It needed to get stronger. I wanted to see more DB help in the draft -- I'm really disappointed about that -- but if GB can generate a better pass rush with a better DL, then maybe that's not a big deal. The age of our CB's and the depth behind them scares me.

I say give the Harrell kid a chance. He's certainly kept his nose cleaner than Lynch or Meriweather, for example. He's had injuries -- which scares me like hell -- but played thru the torn biceps for the FLA game...I can't imagine how that must've felt. I think the kid will get hurt, but he'll play thru pain and he'll be OK as a sub DL. It's possible he wasn't getting good advice on how to take care of his body, or his injuries were genuinely freak injuries. It's also possible he'll be Joe Johnson post-triceps tear.

Mosst of the sportswriters go on highlights and team needs. Yes, they cover the sport for a living and see and know a lot, but they aren't personnel guys. So I guess I'm not surprised King is puzzled by the pick.

[RashanGary]

We differ a lot but I respect everyones opinoins here.

You two could very well be right. This team could be in trouble. I've had fun stressing my opinion but I'm realizing that nobody knows right now. I could be just as wrong *although I don't see it * as you and you could be just as wrong as me. We could all be wrong and we probably will

It will be a fun early part to the season. I expect some youth struggles but I also expect a competitive team that shows signs of a young SB competitor. I want a team similar to the Bengals of a couple years ago. A team similar to the Chargers of 2 years ago. A team that makes too many mistakes but where you say "If they could only get it together"

I think teams like that are the teams taht stand the best chance. It's a young mans game. At some point a good promising team rises. I want signs that we're on that path.

[RashanGary]

Nice post run pMc..

I agree with everything from the draft strategy to the CB need.

Also, I'm a BPA guy *obviously* but I think at some point you draw the line. If you have a damn good punter you don't take one even if he's the BPA. If you have a HOF QB and a 1st round guy behind him that you drafted you don't take a QB with a high pick. If you have 4 stud DT's you don't take another. Other than those type of situations I really believe in BPA.

I think later in the draft there are usually a couple guys and you can get away with taking a the BPA that fits yoru need but early in the draft and at some points there is one player better than all the rest. Unless it is an unusual circumstance like Punter or QB or the other examples above, I think you ahve to take that guy you think is going to be the biggest difference maker. YOu can't take a guy that you think is a lesser talent. I just think playmakers are so important that if you think you have one and you don't really believe in the others that you have to take him. One playmaker can be the differecne in a SB or not.

[Sparkey]

I think the BPA and NEED stuff are not being looked at as a joint evaluation.

TT looks at the BPA player available, however we do not know how they grad their draft board. So, we do not know if their BPA is leveraged towards the difference maker or steady productivity guy.

Regardless of how they rank and weight the players, I do believe that if you have, lets say, three players that grade out to the same number, then you take look at which player would best fill a need versus which player would have the biggest impact during a game.

Assuming Harrel is as good as some scouts rave, that means Pickett and Harrel are the starters, with Williams and Cole as subs. At the ends Kampmann and Jenkins with KGB the main pass rush guy.

Too me, that sounds like a great set of DLinemen, that is solid against the run and Harrel and Pickett in the middle means it will damn damned difficult to single out any one play too double team.

[Bretsky]

We differ a lot but I respect everyones opinoins here.

You two could very well be right. This team could be in trouble. I've had fun stressing my opinion but I'm realizing that nobody knows right now. I could be just as wrong *although I don't see it * as you and you could be just as wrong as me. We could all be wrong and we probably will

It will be a fun early part to the season. I expect some youth struggles but I also expect a competitive team that shows signs of a young SB competitor. I want a team similar to the Bengals of a couple years ago. A team similar to the Chargers of 2 years ago. A team that makes too many mistakes but where you say "If they could only get it together"

I think teams like that are the teams taht stand the best chance. It's a young mans game. At some point a good promising team rises. I want signs that we're on that path.

The whole ride will be interesting; overall our views are not as far away as you might think.

We just have two major differnces

I want to win a lot sooner and am not nearly as patient

You subscribe to the BPA belief; I do not.

I think there are a lot of teams that don't as well.

You can go BPA, or you can go BPA at an area of general need. In that case, if there is nobody of value at a position of general need, you trade down and gather up more picks.

That's what I'd have hoped for GB this past weekend. Trade down, pick up a second, and take the WR about six to eight picks back.

It'll be a fun ride.

B

[b bulldog]

I love defense and all the hard hitting that goes with it. One thing to remember, Williams and Cole are only signed for the 07 seaon, than we will only have Jolley and Pickett under contract at the DT position.

[Partial]

We differ a lot but I respect everyones opinoins here.

You two could very well be right. This team could be in trouble. I've had fun stressing my opinion but I'm realizing that nobody knows right now. I could be just as wrong *although I don't see it * as you and you could be just as wrong as me. We could all be wrong and we probably will

It will be a fun early part to the season. I expect some youth struggles but I also expect a competitive team that shows signs of a young SB competitor. I want a team similar to the Bengals of a couple years ago. A team similar to the Chargers of 2 years ago. A team that makes too many mistakes but where you say "If they could only get it together"

I think teams like that are the teams taht stand the best chance. It's a young mans game. At some point a good promising team rises. I want signs that we're on that path.

That team was very good with LT. Then they landed a premiere player out of nowhere. Sometimes, you just get lucky. Hopefully we get a little luck as well.

[RashanGary]

I'm not strict BPA either Bretsky. I would have been extremely disappointed in Quinn if we would have picked him. That is one position with a HOFer now and Rodgers behind him taht I wouldn't want to take the risk.

There are other situations where I woudn't want BPA either but I am certainly more on teh BPA side than you. Just not all the way like it might seem.

[Partial]

I love defense and all the hard hitting that goes with it. One thing to remember, Williams and Cole are only signed for the 07 seaon, than we will only have Jolley and Pickett under contract at the DT position.

But do you pay Williams for a three-man rotation? Normally in those situations, you hope to have your third rotation guy on 2nd day rookie contract. Otherwise, it gets to become a costly position to maintain.

Likewise, I think Williams will be gone because he'll have the opportunity to start somewhere. If Harrell turns out to be great, this is a fine move. If he is no better or heaven forbid worse than Corey Williams, than that will seal TT's fate.

[RashanGary]

I'd keep Williams. 3 DT's will all get startes minutes. I think you pay based on impact and if you have 3 guys that are high impact players then you pay them all. We have the money thanks to good decision making. There is no need ot be stingey when you do things the right way. I have no problem with paying for impact like Williams 7 sacks. I have problems paying for below average players or for average plaeyrs that make a shit ton of money.

If you're doing things the right way and you're pressed against the cap, that means you are in the SB or damn near it because you have a shit ton of talent. If that day comes we'll have some tough decisions. As for now, we have to keep all of our impact guys in hopes of some day getting to that problem.

[Scott Campbell]

What ever happened to that old saying - you can never have enough good defensive linemen.

I happen to think we did draft for an area of need.

[RashanGary]

What ever happened to that old saying - you can never have enough good defensive linemen.

I happen to think we did draft for an area of need.

I do too actually. I thought a stud DE or a stud DT would have been the most impactfull player we could have gotten outside of a stud RB or S just because of the holes.

[RashanGary]

RB, S, DE, DT, CB, WR

I would have wanted a S or RB first but any of the other 4 positions would have tied for priority #2.

I think QB was the one position I would not have taken early not matter what pretty much.

LB would have been tough but a special one like Willis; I still would have taken over a guy like Meachem.