This is almost hard to believe considering you've mentioned it in every other post.

I personally think judging Ha-Ha harshly at this point is ridiculous. There's just not nearly enough to go by. Same with Davante Adams. These rookies have even less time than they used to in terms of acclimating to the pro game. Whether they come from Alabama or Fresno State, this is the NFL -- the learning curve is a bit more steep.

I remember Vic So'oto looking like a world beater a few years ago in preseason. He's out of the league now.

That's not to say we shouldn't be excited when we see a flash or glimpse of what's to come. We should, because it's fun and shit. But the extent to which one preseason game tells us who was a great pick or who was a dud is severely limited.

Originally Posted by: evad04 

Why is it ridiculous? I'm not saying Ha Ha won't eventually be good...it is way early, but relatively speaking when looking at all our newbies, it is pretty sad I'm most excited about a 7th and a couple of UDFA over the guys we drafted up high.

I loved So'oto....what a game he had vs. the Chiefs to win him a spot. Intangibles are what the game is a lot about. So'oto may have pushed himself to make the team and then got complacent....you never really know. Pennel is a guy I worry about... will he be similar? Give his all to make it and then once he does dial it down?

Pre-season is important... there are many guys who have been pre-season stars who turn into nothing but not always. Matt Hasselbeck comes to mind. Pre-season player who parlayed his strong showing into a nice career.

I'm lamenting that none of our high picks seem to ever show anything to get excited about. Seeing Sherrod just get it handed to was depressing. Another 1st rounder who just sucks. He was being touted as the swing guy with Barclay out. Again, it is sad that a guy like Barclay a street guy offers more to be excited about than a 1st rounder like Sherrod. It happens way too often in Green Bay.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

I still don't understand why it matters all the much *where* you get a guy. If a 5th rounder comes and clearly has it, if anything, it helps make up for underwhelming 1st round guys.

We just hold a very different philosophy with regard to draft status.

I want good players. I don't care where they come from. Some of the best guys on the team are 4th round or later. Sammy Shields representing the undrafted crowd.

Originally Posted by: evad04 

You don't understand that? Generally speaking, most of the blue chip NFL'ers are found up high in the draft. We fail at a ridiculously high rate when it comes to high picks. Yes, it is outstanding we hit on guys nobody ever heard of off the street ala Shields. What would this team be if it hit on guys up high like a Rodgers and Matthews? We get far too many Harrell's and Sherrod's up high.

Do I care that Sam Shields wasn't drafted...nope. Not a bit. It does bother me on the other side of things to see the Green Bay Packers missing on high picks so much. I don't understand why that doesn't bother you? We miss so many opportunities to be a better football team and you can't just brush it off and say...well, we got some good UDFA's so it doesn't matter?? It does matter.

Let Ted Thompson run the post draft process and someone else run the real draft.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

Oh, I thought the guys taken in the first round had the coolest names or something. Yeah -- I'm aware of pedigree immediately out of college. But it doesn't tend to matter once they start playing the games. And to that end I've been mostly quite satisfied with the roster Ted Thompson has put together.

It hasn't been perfect. There have been some definite misses in the 1st round -- though I think it would be fair to give Sherrod more actual game time (of which he's been severely limited). I'd also give Datone more than one year before I label him a bust.

Ultimately what I'm saying is that if we hit on solid players in rounds 4, 5 or 6 then we've made up tons of extra value compared to what you'd "expect" to get out of a purportedly lower-caliber player taken in those rounds. This metric seems to be lost in how you personally view the team. We have missed on some early-round guys; and we've hit, extraordinarily in some other cases, on guys taken later.

Kinda evens out.

Go back and look at every first-round pick over the years -- for all 32 teams. Those rounds are loaded with as many forgettable turds as the other rounds, most years.

So I guess I'll say this: If I felt like the lack of star quality from Round 1 guys was a serious impediment to the franchise, I'd be testier. It's all mitigated by the fact that we have a talented and deep team, for the most part. And hopefully those former 1st rounders turn a corner this year. And if they don't, and the Josh Boyd's and JC Tretter's of the world make a name, all the better for the Pack for finding quality beyond the heralded first round.

Originally Posted by: evad04