DoddPower
11 years ago

I think they would have screamed bloody murder at the time but if we would have drafted Patterson I think they may be OK with it now.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



How could anyone complain with a team adding another potentially elite player, regardless of position? Almost any average NFL caliber player could offer what Datone did this season. There are only a few players from every draft that have the talent of Patterson, if that. Obviously this could change, but at this point, Patterson is absolutely the better pick, even for the Packers.

Of course I truly believe in BPA. If a team adds elite talent almost every single year, chances are they will find a way to have a good team. Be it by draft and develop, trades, having the teams strengths being so strong that they outweigh the weaknesses, or whatever. There is always free agency to fill a couple of holes with average players, at least for some teams. I'll take elite talent every time, and find ways to fill any gaps that it creates. Just seems much easier and logical that way than the reverse.
sschind
11 years ago

How could anyone complain with a team adding another potentially elite player, regardless of position? Almost any average NFL caliber player could offer what Datone did this season. There are only a few players from every draft that have the talent of Patterson, if that. Obviously this could change, but at this point, Patterson is absolutely the better pick, even for the Packers.

Of course I truly believe in BPA. If a team adds elite talent almost every single year, chances are they will find a way to have a good team. Be it by draft and develop, trades, having the teams strengths being so strong that they outweigh the weaknesses, or whatever. There is always free agency to fill a couple of holes with average players, at least for some teams. I'll take elite talent every time, and find ways to fill any gaps that it creates. Just seems much easier and logical that way than the reverse.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 



Don't you think there would have been an uproar of negative responses last year it Ted Thompson would have drafted Patterson? At least more so than the uproar of negative responses that folowed the Jones pick. People didn't see a WR as as big of a need as a pass rusher so if Ted Thompson would have taken Patterson most people would have been upset. At this point yeah, I think almost everyone would be OK with it and I said so in my post.


Take this year for example. The majority of people seem to feel a safety or DL or OLB are our biggest needs. If the BPA is a TE and Ted Thompson takes him most of those people will be angry. If that TE turns out to be the next Graham or Gronk people will change their minds. That is what I meant.

As far as taking the BPA all the time that depends. It's also very subjective. I doubt any two GMs or any draft "experts" have the exact same board so what may be the BPA for half of them may not be the BPA to the other half. Non GMs can make their draft boards without factoring in need. If they think this CB is just a little better than that WR they will have him higher. A GM of a team that desperately needs a WR may have those two players reversed. When it comes time for that GM to make his pick he will probably take the WR. He thinks he is taking the BPA and the experts think he is drafting for need.

Obviously if we are talking about 1 or 2 spots its not a big deal. The problem comes in when the team right in front of your GM takes that WR and now your GM takes a WR he had rated 10 spots below the CB just to fill the need. That is not the right move to make.

The question is should GMs take their current roster into account when they make up their board or should they go simply on their opinions of the players in the draft. I guess ideally they would forget about their current players and simply make a list of the best players in the draft. That would eliminate the possibility of a current weakness on the team influencing their opinion of a particular player or position causing them to inflate their value.
DoddPower
11 years ago

Don't you think there would have been an uproar of negative responses last year it Ted Thompson would have drafted Patterson? At least more so than the uproar of negative responses that folowed the Jones pick. People didn't see a WR as as big of a need as a pass rusher so if Ted Thompson would have taken Patterson most people would have been upset. At this point yeah, I think almost everyone would be OK with it and I said so in my post.


Take this year for example. The majority of people seem to feel a safety or DL or OLB are our biggest needs. If the BPA is a TE and Ted Thompson takes him most of those people will be angry. If that TE turns out to be the next Graham or Gronk people will change their minds. That is what I meant.

As far as taking the BPA all the time that depends. It's also very subjective. I doubt any two GMs or any draft "experts" have the exact same board so what may be the BPA for half of them may not be the BPA to the other half. Non GMs can make their draft boards without factoring in need. If they think this CB is just a little better than that WR they will have him higher. A GM of a team that desperately needs a WR may have those two players reversed. When it comes time for that GM to make his pick he will probably take the WR. He thinks he is taking the BPA and the experts think he is drafting for need.

Obviously if we are talking about 1 or 2 spots its not a big deal. The problem comes in when the team right in front of your GM takes that WR and now your GM takes a WR he had rated 10 spots below the CB just to fill the need. That is not the right move to make.

The question is should GMs take their current roster into account when they make up their board or should they go simply on their opinions of the players in the draft. I guess ideally they would forget about their current players and simply make a list of the best players in the draft. That would eliminate the possibility of a current weakness on the team influencing their opinion of a particular player or position causing them to inflate their value.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



Well, I was completely speaking in hindsight. I understand it's not easy to truly identify whether one player is actually "better" than the other, regardless of position. But if a general manager feels that one player is truly the best player available, than I hope he would take them every time. I liked the Datone Jones pick, and still do. But based on this last season only, Patterson was the better pick. The Packers could have probably signed a dozen different free agents that gave them what Datone Jones did this season, and possibly more. I'm not sure that's the case with a guy like Patterson, unless the Packers traded for Percy Harvin or something . . . and that didn't work out either.
play2win
11 years ago

How could anyone complain with a team adding another potentially elite player, regardless of position? Almost any average NFL caliber player could offer what Datone did this season. There are only a few players from every draft that have the talent of Patterson, if that. Obviously this could change, but at this point, Patterson is absolutely the better pick, even for the Packers.

Of course I truly believe in BPA. If a team adds elite talent almost every single year, chances are they will find a way to have a good team. Be it by draft and develop, trades, having the teams strengths being so strong that they outweigh the weaknesses, or whatever. There is always free agency to fill a couple of holes with average players, at least for some teams. I'll take elite talent every time, and find ways to fill any gaps that it creates. Just seems much easier and logical that way than the reverse.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 



Your point is well taken DoddPower. Imagine how differently this team may have fared this year had we taken Patterson instead of Jones...
porky88
11 years ago
My first mock draft  of the year.

21. Green Bay Packers -- C.J. Mosley, LB, Alabama
Getting tougher upfront is a necessity if Green Bay is to compete with San Francisco and Seattle in the NFC. Mosley fits the bill. Many regard him as one of the elite prospects of this draft, but linebackers tend to fall on draft day, and the Alabama tag makes him a little overrated. Still, Mosley is an excellent two-down linebacker. He and long-time Green Bay linebacker A.J. Hawk would give the Packers a rugged look at the position.


Rockmolder
11 years ago

My first mock draft  of the year.

Originally Posted by: porky88 



May I ask why you see him as a two-down linebacker?
steveishere
11 years ago

May I ask why you see him as a two-down linebacker?

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 



Yeah, I was under the impression that his strength was pass coverage ability.
11 years ago
Remember that time Kiper had Brohm #1?
UserPostedImage
porky88
11 years ago

May I ask why you see him as a two-down linebacker?

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 


I think he’s a good player who is being mistaken for a great player. I conclude this based on two things.

1. He doesn’t react quickly to a play. That doesn’t mean he won’t make the play, but it also means he may not make as many as he should.

2. Do his workout numbers translate into his on-field athleticism? I’ve seen some reports suggest he runs a 4.5 or 4.6 in the 40. I don’t see that on the field. In my opinion, he’ll cover the flats well enough, but he’s not going to turn and run stride for stride with quality NFL tight ends.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

I think he’s a good player who is being mistaken for a great player. I conclude this based on two things.

1. He doesn’t react quickly to a play. That doesn’t mean he won’t make the play, but it also means he may not make as many as he should.

2. Do his workout numbers translate into his on-field athleticism? I’ve seen some reports suggest he runs a 4.5 or 4.6 in the 40. I don’t see that on the field. In my opinion, he’ll cover the flats well enough, but he’s not going to turn and run stride for stride with quality NFL tight ends.

Originally Posted by: porky88 



Hawk 2.0
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
dfosterf (6h) : I'm going to call that a good move.
Zero2Cool (20h) : Packers sign CB Corey Ballentine
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : I'm not sure how to kill the draft order just yet so it's not so confusing.
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : *to be able
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : and because it's not a dynasty league (which makes a lot more sense to be ability to trade picks)
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Oh I know; I was just exploring and it blew my mind that you could trade picks because of the whole reordering thing
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Zero, I think I preferred my offer: your 1st for my 15th rounder
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : Keep in mind, we do a draft reorder once all members locked in
Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : You can have my 12th Rd for your 2nd round
Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Hey i didn't know we could trade picks in fantasy
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Update: Rock has tried a cheese curd, promises it's not his last
Zero2Cool (3-Aug) : watch it!! lol
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : you're right, we never did leave, the site just went down :P
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Rock claims to have never eaten a cheese curd
Zero2Cool (3-Aug) : We did not leave.
Mucky Tundra (3-Aug) : Family Night! WE ARE SO BACK!
Mucky Tundra (2-Aug) : To this day, I'm still miffed about his 4 TD game against Dallas on Thanksgiving going to waste
Martha Careful (2-Aug) : Congratulations Sterling Sharpe. He was terrific and I loved watching him play.
beast (2-Aug) : I believe it's technically against the CBA rules, but Jerry just calls it a simple unofficial chat... and somehow gets away with it.
beast (2-Aug) : Jerry Jones is infamous for ̶n̶e̶g̶o̶t̶i̶a̶t̶i̶n̶g̶ chatting with players one on one... and going around the agent.
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : Oo just saw a blurb saying that Dallas negotiated directly with Parsons and not through his agent
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : I assumed that both guys will get paid, just a matter of when or how we get there
Zero2Cool (1-Aug) : McLaurin nor Micah going anywhere. They will get money
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : the Synder years or do they take care of one of their own?
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : Do the Commanders risk losing a top WR with an emerging QB just because he's turning 30 and potentially risk damaging the rebuild from
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : Turns 30 this September, plays at a high level and Washington has some cap space I believe
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : More interesting is Washington with Terry McLaurin
Mucky Tundra (1-Aug) : I would imagine Dallas will resolve this issue with a truckload of money
Zero2Cool (1-Aug) : Micah pulling a Myles with trade request
beast (1-Aug) : Packers should make some cheese forks
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : GRAB THE PITCHFORKS~
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : CUT HIM
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : Socieltal collapse imminent
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : The West has fallen
Mucky Tundra (31-Jul) : After starting off camp with 25 straight made field goals, Brandon McManus has missed one
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : But it should be stable
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : It's probably gonna be slower.
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : We're gonna just full go on to the new host.
Zero2Cool (31-Jul) : What crap. Site issues galore
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : if PH dies, there is packerpeople com available
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : database is on new host, eventually website will follow
Mucky Tundra (30-Jul) : Zero, regarding Ewers, you are correct.
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Sadly, this might be our life for awhile. I could put it on another host, but seems it was slower, although more stable
beast (30-Jul) : How long will it be down?
beast (30-Jul) : RIP site 😭
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Site will die, I have to restart it.
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Quinn stinks. Lot of underthrows. (my guess)
beast (30-Jul) : How did Quinn Ewers effect where Golden was drafted?
dfosterf (30-Jul) : All I've experienced was late at night or early morning. I just figured you were doing something in the background
Zero2Cool (30-Jul) : Site sure seems to be down more than up
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

4h / Fantasy Sports Talk / packerfanoutwest

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

3-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

3-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

2-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

2-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

28-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jul / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.