SNAPPER STOCKPILING STRATEGY OF DRAFT PICKS

[Bretsky]

TT has certainly mastered this art; I must admit I was a bit surprised this year.

Before the draft TT noted that this draft was not as talent deep as previous ones. What I took out of that is he may not play the stockpiling game as much as in the past. I was wrong.

The art of stockpiling draft picks by trading down certainly gives you more room for failure; everybody will hit and miss on some so having more gives you the better chance.

In general, I have no complaints about the Snapper Stockpiling Strategy. Last year we seemed to add a lot of youthful depth that was too bare after the Sherman era.

But looking at our roster deeper, I'm left to wonder how we have numerous young players with potential and we might not be able to keep them all.

Going a step further, I also wonder if this strategy has left us at a point where we are ripping through players to replace the bottom fifth of our roster with players that are pretty much the same.

Thoughts ????

[Tarlam!]

Your thinking is dead on. Well, at least it's dead on with my thinking!

I actually suspected TT would go up and get Adrian Peterson, if not Marshawn Lynch when he said draft depth was shallow.

The strategy is a good one only, if he hits on more than he misses, since he is reluctant to add mediocre FAs, even if they are better than low round rookies.

This draft seems designed to yield starters in a few years at say, OT.

Still, I like the Harrel pick now that it's sunk in. I am also harboring quiet confidence that Wynn will prove he should have been a first day choice by getting his act together.

Ultimately, Bretsky, we can only have 53 players and a handful on the scout team. I suspect we will have a revolving door at 3rd/4th string, which isn't great for the team.

[Joemailman]

I have a feeling trading down is in TT's blood. If you have a strong deep draft, you can justify trading down by saying that high quality players are available in the middle rounds. If you have a draft that lacks quality depth, you can justify trading down by saying that the best players on the board in say, round 3, are no better than the players who will be available in round 5. My sense is that TT will always believe that by trading down, he can get multiple players who, although flawed in some ways, fit well into the system.

[RashanGary]

Corey Williams will be the big test if we are going to let our own impact guys go. I think we sign him long term this season or next off season during his RFA year. We will have Harrell, Williams and Pickett for a couple more years and we will truely dominate the middle of the line, something we havn't done on defense in a long ass time.

We still need to find a pass rushing DE to replace KGB but right now our DL is looking very strong and deep in relation to most NFL teams. We also have playmaking LB's lined up behind them so I am excited to see this defense line up and make plays this season. Thanks to Thompsons BPA approach, we might just get a chance to see a truely dominate front 7 for te first time since Reggie. We could have had a WR, which we needed. Instead we might have a dominate defense. I'll take that every time.

[RashanGary]

I keep saying this, but Hawk is my biggest bright spot this off season. His work ethic combined with the way he played last year has me pretty excited for 07. Harrell is going to make an impact on this team by opening things up for Hawk/Barnett.

Hawk, C. Williams, Harrell, Barnett, Jenkins, Pickett, Kampman, Harris, Woodson, Collins and company are a good, solid unit. If Hawk becomes a premier A-1 defender, we just made a good defense great. I have a lot of optimism for this season. I truely believe football is a young mans game and our young guys are going to physically outmatch the opponent pretty consistantly.

[run pMc]

It's a good strategy when you are rebuilding.
If you are a team that's made the playoffs for the last few years and a shot at a conference championship, you probably need to dust off the checkbook, sign a quality FA or two, and either stand pat, trade out for future picks, or trade up for that playmaker to put you "over the edge".

[CaliforniaCheez]

The Packers were tied for second in acquiring the most draft picks of the 2005 draft with 11 picks(Tampa had 12).

In 2006 and 2007 the Packers have had the most draft picks.

That is a total of 34 Thompson draft picks in three years.

The Packers got 3 or 4 starters out of the 2005 draft depending on your opinion of Underwood and Whitticker. With 6 still on the roster.

The Packers got 4 starters in the 2006 draft so far. 10 still on the roster

In the 2007 draft it is too early to tell.

Let's say the Packers continue this mode of drafting double digit picks and about 7 making the squad every year. That is not enough to keep a sustained roster of 53 as it will take 7 to 8 years get 53 players and the average career is between 4 and 5 years. Getting 4 starters a year in a draft still requires 6+ years to sustain 22 starters plus specialists.

The team needs to acquire 10 new players a year, on average to sustain the roster.
Now when a team is good it may not require so many players and when it is bad it needs more but on average 10 new players on the 53 roster.

If 7 are draft picks (Under the Thompson plan) the other 3 have to come from Free Agency, undrafted rookies, trades etc.

It cannot be done through the draft alone. The draft is the bulk of new player acquisitions. If 10 new players is the average for sustaining a team, then more than 10 must be acquired to improve.

10 new players from 2005 are on the current roster.
38 new players from 2006 are on the current roster.
24 new players so far are on the roster or are unsigned draft picks in 2007.

Of course not all will make the team.

These are general trends of course and there are exceptions to the general trends.

Some times a team goes through many players looking for a good one.

Something to think about when comparing the ups and downs of a football team over the years.

[RashanGary]

Nice point cheese. There is undrafted FA's, minimum waiver guys, NFL Europe guys and regular free agency.

I think you have to be oppertunistic in every avenue like Cullen Jenkins for example or Ruvell Martin. I just have a problem with the high priced FA's. I think they almost always hurt you.

[Packnut]

FA

Nice point cheese. There is undrafted FA's, minimum waiver guys, NFL Europe guys and regular free agency.

I think you have to be oppertunistic in every avenue like Cullen Jenkins for example or Ruvell Martin. I just have a problem with the high priced FA's. I think they almost always hurt you.

Woodson is a prime example of why your thinking on FA's is wrong. It's a quick easy method of adding talent. The trick is ya just gotta know who to sign and who to stay away from. That requires a ton of work. Countless hours of game film and talking to team-mates of said player to try and determine character. You also have to determine the players strengths with the scheme you run.

[Spaulding]

I'm not so sure on that with regard to FA. The risk associated with the big contract, the impact to team chemistry when you're paying an outside player big bucks could have a major negative impact.

I think you only go for broke on a big name FA when:

A) You're the one or two players away from pushing for the Superbowl
B) He's a pro-bowl player that the current roster will respect and learn from and
is a leader in the locker room
C) You've got a crap load of cap room and nothing else to spend it on

Given the Packers current situation, I only see option C like the Woodson signing and thankfully that has so far worked out well. Personally, I like TT's philosophy of drafting hungry players mostly with leadership characteristics (Hawk, Harrell, Jones, etc.). Short of Reggie White, what other FA signings have been key to our francise? Some might argue Keith Jackson or Sean Jones and both played a part but without Reggie on the team the signings might have turned out to be a fiasco. Heck Jackson may never have reported and Jones effectiveness might never have been seen.

A hungry young team with the right coaching, chemistry and old school leadership (Favre, Harris, etc.) will hopefully make more strides than a high priced team of FA signings (most recently Redskins, Browns, etc.).

Ultimately, if a team pays it's own players, they will likely play hard and push each other with the thought that they don't need to shop themselves to get paid when their contract comes up. This simple change in mentality I think is often overlooked. How do you bond with the guy next to you knowing he's always thinking I need to produce so I can hit the FA market? Who knows the value of a player better than the team on which he's on and sees him practice and play day in and out?

I like the direction of this team and I think this is a team that will bring attitude and has bright future.

With that, anybody know the current stock price of whoever produces Kool-Aid as I need to buy some serious stock in it to supply my optimistic thirst.

[wist43]

You guys have hit on most of the prescient points wrt to TT's philosophies and trading down...

There's a time and place for everything. You can't keep drafting 11-12 players every year... all you accomplish is turning over the bottom end of the roster year after year.

At some point you have to swing for the fences on a position of need, or a can't miss stud regardless of position. Since TT never, ever, addresses needs, I doubt this will ever happen.

Some will argue that TT addressed needs by taking Jackson and Jones... but, there's a severe drop off from those guys to the potential difference makers that can only be had at the top of the draft, or with a big $$$ FA contract.

I don't see TT ever adjusting his approach... as someone said, "it's in his blood". I think TT is a good talent evaluator, and will ultimately build a decent team, but I think we're looking at perenniel 8-8/10-6 teams that really don't have a chance to win it all.

Taking further into account the fact that Favre's days are numbered, and the schemes they run on both sides of the ball, i.e. "midget ball" on offense, and the passive "anti-blitz" scheme they run on defense... I think it's very unlikely they'll ever be able to put it all together and bring a championship back to GB.

[GoPackGo]

You guys have hit on most of the prescient points wrt to TT's philosophies and trading down...

There's a time and place for everything. You can't keep drafting 11-12 players every year... all you accomplish is turning over the bottom end of the roster year after year.

At some point you have to swing for the fences on a position of need, or a can't miss stud regardless of position. Since TT never, ever, addresses needs, I doubt this will ever happen.

Some will argue that TT addressed needs by taking Jackson and Jones... but, there's a severe drop off from those guys to the potential difference makers that can only be had at the top of the draft, or with a big $$$ FA contract.

I don't see TT ever adjusting his approach... as someone said, "it's in his blood". I think TT is a good talent evaluator, and will ultimately build a decent team, but I think we're looking at perenniel 8-8/10-6 teams that really don't have a chance to win it all.

Taking further into account the fact that Favre's days are numbered, and the schemes they run on both sides of the ball, i.e. "midget ball" on offense, and the passive "anti-blitz" scheme they run on defense... I think it's very unlikely they'll ever be able to put it all together and bring a championship back to GB.

I agree that at some point you have to swing for the fences but....
I don't think you swing for the fences until you have built a strong team through the draft and you just need that little addition to your team to put you over the top.
As far as Jackson and Jones.......
What RB did you want to draft? Peterson and Lynch were both gone by our 1st pick.
What WR did you want to draft? All of the 1st and 2nd round talent (minus C. Johnson)didn't seem to be that great.
Let TT evaluate talent and when he gets us close, if he fails to swing for the fences, then we call for his head.

[retailguy]

I don't see TT ever adjusting his approach... as someone said, "it's in his blood". I think TT is a good talent evaluator, and will ultimately build a decent team, but I think we're looking at perenniel 8-8/10-6 teams that really don't have a chance to win it all.

This is EXACTLY what Thompson and staff built in Seattle. Good, solid team, but WON'T ever win the Super Bowl.

[wist43]

I actually like Jackson, just as I like Morency... but, they're very similar backs - and, since I don't view Morency as an every down player... did TT spend a 2nd round pick on a PT player??? or worse, a backup.

Who drafts a player in the 2nd round with the expectation that he'll be a good backup???

As for Jones, don't know much about him - except that he's pretty good sized, strong, good hands, and can't run. He'll get PT b/c of his draft status, but he was a huge reach. Jones is TT's "I'm smarter than you" pick.

Is Jones better than Carlyle Holliday??? Holliday played pretty well at the end of last year... does picking Jones bump Holliday off the roster??? If so, and he's basically the same thing as Holliday, how does that make the team better???

As many have been pointing out... TT's approach, at some point, just keeps turning the bottom of the roster over and over again.

[Patler]

I can't fault TT for accumulating draft picks and players at least to this point. The roster needed whole-sale changes in my opinion. Eventually, there will be a need to get the one, two or three keys that are needed. I doubt they are there yet.