Thompson and Positional Need
By PackerAaron
Last night, Daniel Jeremiah, a former scout for the Ravens and Browns and creator of MoveTheSticks.com, offered up this answer to a follower over on his Twitter account:
You think an OLB for GB? > Ryan Matthews RB Fresno State... Back to back years picking a Matthews (Clay and Ryan)
Which prompted this response from a faithful Packer fan:
Seriously, 1st round RB for GB?? With OT/OLB/CB issues we have??>> don't be shocked...
Seriously, after Justin Harrell and Jordy Nelson, and then the trade up for Clay Matthews last year - NOTHING should shock Packer fans when it comes to Thompson and the draft.
I know fans and even many hardcore darftniks like to look at roster holes and then fill them with the best players (to their eyes) that might be available when their team is picking. That just isn't the way Thompson operates on most occasions. He's not a 'positional need' guy. Never has been. He is all about loading up on as many good football players as he can. Period.
Now, I know some will point to last years' selections of Raji and Matthews and say how it flies in the face of what I've written above. It's true Thompson used those picks on needs. But the switch to the 3-4 defense mostly necessitated he find players to fill out the scheme over the course of the coming years, and Raji and Matthews certainly fit the bill there. But I think, a year into the transition, you'll see a return to more traditional Thompson drafting, trading down, acquiring picks and finding as many good football players as he can.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Comments (15)
February 19, 2010 at 12:08 pm
It's been argued that Thompson has drafted the way he has because they needed to build a solid team first. Now we have a more than solid team. I hope he picks (what he thinks are) superstars in any position available to put us over the edge instead of just filling positions. Despite some people's exaggeration, we don't have any glaring holes...we just need playmakers. A big "just" of course, but odds are that's not something you're going to fill trading down.
PackerAaron
February 19, 2010 at 12:50 pm
Nick - I agree that is what Thompson was doing to some extent. And I don't think you'll see the trading-back-three-times-in-one-round type stuff much at all anymore. But playmakers can come from anywhere in the draft. Not only that, more bodies in camp means more competition, which is excellent.
February 19, 2010 at 01:16 pm
The pack should pick Myron Rolle, the guys a genius and good football player.
PackerAaron
February 19, 2010 at 02:18 pm
DR.AW - actually, I would love that.
February 19, 2010 at 01:28 pm
Ive "noticed" (or think I have at least) that TT does in fact draft for "need" with his first pick he just does it a year early. AJ Hawk 06...nick barnett free agent in 07; Harrell in 07...corey williams free agent in 08, Raji and CM3 in 09....pickett and kampman free agents in 10 Seems to me that almost all his first round picks corresponded to a position where a key member of the team was set to be a free agent the following year. May just be a coincidence but thats the way he seems to be doing things to me. That way we have a guy in the system a year if we choose not to retain those players instead of bringing in a rookie and them having to produce immedeately. Its just a theory but I expect TT to draft a DE (Id guess Odrick from PSU) with the first pick this year with Jenkins being a free agent after next season IMO not likely to be retained.
PackerAaron
February 19, 2010 at 02:47 pm
wgbeethree - Gold star. That is EXACTLY what Thompson does.
February 19, 2010 at 01:37 pm
Really, I'm almost more interested to see which free agents end up coming back and which ones go than what we draft. Sounds weird, but I think it's probably more important to the '10 Packers.
February 19, 2010 at 01:42 pm
I agree with NickGBP.
I think it has more to do with the closure of the rebuilding process, than with draft strategy.
-
Don't get me wrong, TT will almost never reach for a player. But he'll not get a RB when we're stacked at RB, not if there's a position of need player with the same value.
-
Unless Matthews is in his top 10, and falls to the 23. So I could see Spiller being picked. But if Matthews is his #16, and Bulaga is his #20, he'll go with Bulaga.
February 19, 2010 at 01:44 pm
I guess Thompson knows what he's doing. Only thirty two men on the planet get to do the Job he's doing. I'll trust him for whatever he wants to do.
Mr. Nagler, just to let you know, I posted about your problem/epic success on my Pack blog today. Hopefully, it will get the attention of a few more people.
Go Pack Go!
February 19, 2010 at 06:22 pm
I sure wouldn't mind a speedy HB. Might even make the Oline look better.
February 19, 2010 at 06:54 pm
I believe we should get another explosive guy in the offense, imagine with what we already got plus another damn we might turn out to be one of the best offenses of all time. Packers have never really been known for their defense well yeah in some years but the offense is what this team has been known for over the years. Come on TT get a Percy Harvin type player and we will go to the next step. GO PACK GO!!!!!
February 19, 2010 at 07:25 pm
The OLine is a NEED. I hope Ted takes care of that, then, have fun TT, strategize to your heart's desire.
February 20, 2010 at 01:45 am
(this scenario would be if all of the top OTs were gone).
I think that RB is more of a need then people think. Jackson/Wynn can't stay healthy. However, I think the Packers would be better off bringing Green back for one more year. The Packers play the Vikings twice, Eagles, and New England next year. Imagine a repeat of the Packer-Cardinal play off game if CB depth isn't addressed.
PackerAaron
February 20, 2010 at 06:59 am
sunflower - agree that RB is more of a need than people are acknowledging. Also agree that something has to be done to address the depth in the secondary, though I think safety is actually the more pressing need.
February 20, 2010 at 10:41 am
It is time to address the O-line, it does not matter if you get any more weapons if A-rod does not have time to throw, we are already under utilizing our current weapons potential to make up for deficiencies on the O-line. Combined with the fact we switched defenses last year and have yet the proper personnel to run that defense against the better teams in the league. IMO our defense as it currently stands is not as good as everyone thinks. Other than Dallas/Ravens of which both were home games where I think pure heart and determination won, this defense can not stop a top rated offense with a great QB. Position needs in order of priority are Left Tackle, LB (inside or out) with outstanding pass rush and coverage skills, secondary help (CB/Safety)