Post Draft: What Are Realistic Expectations For The Packers?

With the NFL draft in the books, we look ahead to the time between now and when training camp begins for the Green Bay Packers.  They'll hold organized team activities (OTA's) in May and June and hold a mini camp in June as well.  This is when they'll install any changes to the offense, defense and special teams and give the new players a first look at the team environment and for the rookies, their first taste of real NFL life.  

It's also the first glance at the new year's team and is when impressions and opinions about the upcoming season begin to form.  It's very early and we haven't seen any of these players, or even the veterans, in pads yet but what are the realistic expectations for this year's Packers?  It's easy to say "Super Bowl or bust" or that they should achieve more than they did last season.  Those are always possible with the consistently sound rosters the Packers field each season but is 2016 going to continue or buck that trend?  The answer largely lies in how much the Packers can get from their rookie class, as that is and has been the primary method general manager Ted Thompson uses to infuse new talent onto the roster.

The Packers entered the draft with nine picks and added seven players.  While Thompson has widely been known for sticking with his board and taking the best player available early in the draft, this year it was obvious that need was a bigger factor.  Going in, the Packers' biggest needs were at linebacker, both inside and out, defensive line and depth on the offensive line.  Defensive tackle Kenny Clark was taken in the first round and by all accounts, he was the Packers' guy from the get go.  B.J. Raji retired and won't be playing this season and the Packers had to replace him.  Many players had been mocked or rumored to be on Green Bay's radar: linebackers Reggie Ragland and Noah Spence along with defensive lineman Andrew Billings, Clark and Jarran Reed were among those names.  In addition, linebacker Myles Jack continued to fall down the board in the first round, creating intrigue with what the Packers might do with the chance to add such an extraordinary player at a great value late in the first round and also fill a need.  Seemed too good to be true?  It was.  Jack's knee injury scared every single team away in the first round and the Packers stuck with Clark despite all of the previously mentioned players also available to them.  On paper, Raji is replaced and the defensive line gets an immediate contributor.

The Packers traded up to select offensive lineman Jason Spriggs in the second round.  Spriggs had a first round grade to some teams and Thompson was worried that he would miss out on the opportunity to pick the Hoosier lineman if he didn't jump up a few spots.  This pick seems to indicate that the Packers want to be prepared if they should lose a veteran lineman or two after this season.  The second round has been one of Thompson's best over his history in Green Bay so the hope is that continues to be the case with Spriggs, but he's not likely to play much this year.  Adding a depth player that early in the draft taxes the need areas and expectations of the picks that follow.

The third round saw the selection of linebacker Kyler Fackrell.  This pick seemed reminiscent of the third round in 2014 when the Packers drafted Khyri Thornton and Richard Rodgers.  Both picks had many scratching their heads and were well ahead of each player's value at the time.  Thornton isn't even with the Packers anymore and Rodgers has been so marginal that Thompson actually signed an outside veteran who has spent time with another NFL team in Jared Cook.  Not many had heard Fackrell's name prior to this selection by Green Bay and that's mostly because last year he was coming off of a torn ACL in 2014.  His stock dropped and many scouts took him off their board completely because of the injury.  The concern is that he can't play in space effectively but youth is on his side to that remains to be seen.  Still, Fackrell is the biggest wild card in this draft class and comes in with the expectation of providing depth on the outside.  Fingers crossed that he can but that's far from certain.

In the fourth round, Thompson again addressed inside linebacker with Stanford's Blake Martinez and added another defensive lineman in Dean Lowry.  Last year, Thompson selected Jake Ryan in the fourth round and Ryan wound up becoming a starter mid way through 2015.  That was mostly because the incumbent, Nate Palmer, was ineffective.  Ryan racked up quite a few tackles but still has some growing to do and that's about what you would expect from a fourth round pick.  Some are excited about the scouting report on Martinez being one of the best cover linebackers in the draft.  There's a big difference between college and the pro's, however.  Martinez is still a fourth rounder and if he's truly going to push for a starting job, he's either exceeding expectations by quite a bit or one of Ryan and Sam Barrington have fallen off.  The former is the best case scenario, but we're not even a year removed from an example of why patience is necessary with a player of that caliber.

Rounds five and six saw the addition of wide receiver Trevor Davis and offensive lineman Kyle Murphy, respectively.  Davis is a burner and ran a sub 4.40-40 yard dash.  Speed was sorely needed at the wide receiver position with Jordy Nelson aging and coming off ACL surgery and average speed everywhere else besides Jeff Janis.  Much like Martinez, Davis lasted to the fifth round for a reason.  He looks to be a player the Packers can get a lot from, both as a receiver and a kick returner, but he hasn't gone up against NFL coverage yet.  Fortunately, the Packers already have six receivers with actual game experience in their offense and that they could run with again this year.  The pressure on Davis is diminished there.  Murphy is nothing more than depth and may find himself a victim of a numbers game by the end of the preseason.

Then there's the usual bevy of undrafted free agents who were added immediately after the draft and we know by now that there's a good chance that one or two of them will crack the final roster.

Considering that the Packers dealt with a number of injuries on offense last year and saw some of their lowest production totals in recent years and still had a chance to advance to the conference championship game, there is reason to be encouraged.  There are also those who feel that Thompson's constant reliance on unproven and late-round college players to boost the team's production is keeping the Packers from achieving more with such a solid core in place.  Their mantra is "you get what you pay for" and the Packers are not big spenders on proven and veteran free agents.

With Aaron Rodgers under center and healthy, the Packers can almost count on at least 10 wins.  That is usually enough to get a team into the playoffs.  If this draft class contributes as is commonly expected at each level and with the return of Nelson, it's realistic to expect the Packers to be major contenders in the NFC again.  The other side of that coin could spell trouble, as we saw with the regression of receiver Davante Adams last season, for example.  The more that is expected of guys after round one, the bigger the risk and chance that he won't be enough of what the team needs.  Despite this common logic, Thompson sticks with his scouting team and trusts them to find guys who will answer the bell.  Health is always a factor as well, but if the Packers get a stroke of good luck in that department, they could be set up for something more than we've seen since they brought home the Lombardi trophy in 2010.  But that's just early-May talk.  There's another four months until we find out how realistic those expectations are.

-------------------

Jason is a freelance writer on staff since 2012 and also co-hosts Cheesehead TV Live, Pulse of the Pack and Pack A Day podcasts.  You can follow him on Twitter here

NFL Categories: 
0 points
 

Comments (65)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
packerfan9507's picture

February 13, 2019 at 07:42 pm

Go Pack

0 points
0
0
TKWorldWide's picture

May 02, 2016 at 06:31 am

Last paragraph.
Yes.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

May 02, 2016 at 11:34 am

Of course the Vikings have drafted better... they've had far superior picks drafting toward the top. I wouldn't say Zimmer has coached any better than McCarthy either.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:15 pm

Zimmer hasn't, but we can't count on McCarthy outclassing the Vikings and Bears coaches anymore either.

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

May 02, 2016 at 03:47 pm

According to the playoffs ...special teams coaching isn't too great :)

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 02, 2016 at 06:43 am

I like this draft and I think most of the picks gave the Packers good value AND filled a need for this year or next. I LOVE the Packers 3rd and 4th round picks. Lowry is stout holding the edge in the run game so just maybe there will be more 2nd and 11 instead of 2nd and 4. Fackrell played well enough coming off the injury and should be at least stronger this year. It was refreshing to see TT actually draft 2 LB'ers who can cover.

K.J. Wright was a 4th round pick and take a look at their Combines, almost identical. If anything Martinez had better combines scores in the spandex olympics, at least where it would matter. He came from Stanford so he's smart as hell

Wright http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=72570&draftyear=...

Martinez
http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=124191&draftyear...

The O-Line was addressed and I'm alreading loving the idea of Daniels and Clark on the line with any combination of CMIII, Peppers, Perry, Fackrell, Elliot, and even Ryan who played OLB in College.

I think Clark even as a rookie will be an upgrade over Raji. B.J had really fallen off since 2010. Clearly he played better in 2015 but it wasn't so great where Clark couldn't exceed it PLUS gets a few sacks.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:46 am

So agree with your comment about D line. Just reading tbe list of players is an improvement over last group and just seems like far less of a stretch as in the past two years. Expecting better results fron the same cast of characters mainly Raji, Neal.

0 points
0
0
packer4real's picture

May 02, 2016 at 06:47 am

I'm a little confused concerning our packers picks, but the staff has done well through out the drafts so I put trust in the staff. Nevertheless, the the Lions and the viking actually doesn't fear me because I know how they play. But the bears under John fox and the defensive coordinator for the bears is something to think about. Fox love to run the ball and the d coordinator love to blitz. Need a speedster running back.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:17 pm

Throughout "the drafts"?

Including 2011 and 12? Those drafts where absolutely terrible.

Thankfully 2015 and 16 offer reasons for optimism.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 06:57 am

My expectations for this draft class are:

Kenny Clark - Starting NT in the 3-4 base. Rotating as DT in the Nickel and Dime. I really think Clark is a perfect fit for what the Packers do on defense. He is at his best over center.

Jason Spriggs - Backup LT & RT. Spriggs likely will redshirt this year barring injury. With Bulaga routinely missing games almost every year, I do expect Spriggs to see some action this year. Likely he was drafted to replace Bakhtiari next year.

Kyler Fackrell - Rotational OLB. Packers like to rotate their OLB's to keep them fresh. I expect Fackrell to be in the rotation right away. I wouldn't be surprised if he was used more as the season wears on.

Blake Martinez - Backup ILB to start the season. I think Martinez could follow a similar path as Jake Ryan last year. Start the season as a backup but play more as the season wears on. I wouldn't be surprised if he was in on the Nickel and Dime early in the season though. Matinez was rated as one of the best coverage LB's in college for a reason. He is very smooth in coverage.

Dean Lowry - Rotational DE. Lowry is the first true 5 technique DE the Packers have had. I am excited to see how Capers uses him. Lowry is very stout against the run. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he was a starter/regular in the base 3-4. He might not offer a lot against the pass but he does really produce against the run. He takes up blockers really well which allows the LB's to get to the QB.

Trevor Davis - Backup WR, KR. I was surprised by the pick of Trevor Davis. But looking more at Davis the more I like. Packers are already deep at WR going 6 deep. Davis is #7. But Drafting Davis is insurance incase Nelson or Montgomery has setbacks in their injuries. For example McCathy said that Montgomery should be ready by Training Camp. Well what if he isn't? Davis could be the main KR from day 1. I don't think they would keep 7 WR's, but with injuries and whatnot you never know how it will work out. I would not be shocked if they kept 7 WR's. They are gaining 2 offensive spots on the roster by not keeping a 3rd QB and not resigning Kuhn.

Kyle Murphy - Backup RT/G. Murphy I was surprised to see still there in the 6th round. He isn't as athletic as Spriggs, but he is really good player. I would not be surprised if in 2017 our Starting OL had Spriggs at LT and Murphy at a G spot.

Overall I think this was a very good draft. Its not sexy by any means. But it provides major depth along both Lines. Which is where the game is won and lost.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:40 am

I read that Dean Lowry has 6 passes batted down last season!

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 08:20 am

I honestly do think Lowry can develop as a pass rusher. His size is tremendous. I think he can become a better player there. To start his career I think he will be more of a run defender though. I don't really expect to see him put up big sack numbers in his career. If he does, that would be an added bonus.

0 points
0
0
Idiot Fan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 09:20 am

He must have batted them down with his head or something. Reading all the "anonymous scouts", you get the picture that his hands are directly connected to his shoulder sockets.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

May 03, 2016 at 03:20 am

Well I went to check that on his photo. Unless they are not photoshopped it looks like Dean have his arms!

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:56 am

I think what you point toward is the key idea: this is a transitional draft. There's only a couple players here who we can expect to play significant roles on this team if the roster stays--by and large--healthy in 2016. Clark, for certain, should have a meaningful role from the outset. After that? I think Lowry, Martinez and Fackrell will get some situational snaps and could see their roles grow as the season goes by. I think an ILB tandem of Ryan and Martinez would be pretty decent...at least in comparison to recent tries. With Clark and Lowry (depending on his role) ILB play, at least on run-downs, may have stepped up meaningfully. Overall, though, this is a draft aimed at 2017 and beyond, and that's the way it should be.

What I find myself wondering is: how many of these players will the Packers have to try to sneak through the practice squad? Murphy looks like a guy who might be destined for the PS. It's possible that Davis has the chops as a PR to displace Abby and take some of the PR snaps from Hyde. That might save him.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 09:09 am

I think a lot of this draft was for the future.

I really don't think any of these players will be on the PS. I would be really surprised if all 7 didn't make the 53. Thompson rarely likes to cut draft picks. So I would be very surprised.

0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

May 02, 2016 at 11:53 am

I do not see any of them going to practice squad, this team will be a different mix than last year.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 12:29 pm

I completely agree.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 02, 2016 at 03:22 pm

I wouldn't think Murphy could make it through to the PS. With Bahk, Sitton, Lindsey, Lang, Bulaga, Spriggs, Murphy and Trettor that's 8 which would be the absolute minimun and after last year 9 would be my guess which leaves Walker, Taylor, and Rothman to battle for the 9th. With who's going to be here next year 9 would be smart too.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:53 am

Like your thinking RC. Cheered me up today.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 09:11 am

I wasn't overly excited about the draft right away after it just made a lot of sense. This draft was a bring your lunch pale to work type of draft. Big men, solidifying both lines. You win games in the trenches and the Packers really helped solidify them.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 02, 2016 at 03:11 pm

@RC regarding Martinez

I'm interested in seeing if Dom likes what he sees in Martinez' ability to run and cover in space. And not to put too much expectation(s) on Pikula, but his athleticism and speed should (key word) be perfect for what our Dime ILB needs. I'll be following him closely.

Martinez or Pikula replacing Joe Thomas -- I'll take that.

EDIT:
https://youtu.be/kb77bI2iGwc?t=25m14s - Martinez

https://youtu.be/kb77bI2iGwc?t=44m58s - Martinez (if that ball wasn't deflected)

NOW THIS I REALLY LIKE

https://youtu.be/bIVE_6VXTx4?t=51m43s

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:42 pm

Do we know where Barrington is in his recovery? Is he 100%?

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:58 pm

I don't know, but unless he had a setback he should be fully recovered. It happened in week 1, if I'm not mistaken

He's pulling in 400-pound sharks out of the ocean -- it better be 100 percent healed. Lol

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 02, 2016 at 05:27 pm

I'm worried about monty making a full recovery. Haven't heard squat about the high ankle sprain.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 02, 2016 at 06:49 pm

True. Last update I could find is April 17th saying he's off crutches. I don't think he's close to running yet. I'd be surprised if this carried into the regular season though.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:38 am

Seems like all is in place for things to come together. Health, return to form for some, and new talent in areas of need, speed, ability and depth. Excited to see how season unfolds!!!

0 points
0
0
gr7070's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:38 pm

Health returning to form?

That would be another season like 2015 or 2013 or 2012. The generally healthy 2014 is the outlier.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:43 pm

^^^THIS^^^

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:39 am

"Rounds five and six saw the addition of wide receiver Kyle Davis and offensive lineman Kyle Murphy, respectively. "

So we have two Kyles and Kyler? BTW...who's Kyle Davis? ;)

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:42 am

Maybe there is Tyler Davis and Tyle Murphy? Who knows. Ted Thompson knows to be very puzzling...

0 points
0
0
jasonperone's picture

May 02, 2016 at 03:27 pm

Since you asked, I want to be the first here to say that Kyle Davis, the WR at Auburn will be one of the next big things in the NFL when he's there!

Otherwise, I don't know, post updated and thank you!

0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:48 am

Green Bay's biggest obstacle isn't Seattle or Carolina; it's what it has been for the past 6 years....injuries! You can say, everyone has injuries, and they do. Teams that usually have their Oline intact for the playoffs go deep. The Packer's last healthy season for their O and Dlines ended with a bizarre loss in Seattle. YET Aaron Rodgers was also working on one leg so any extended run that year should be considered fortunate. So it appears that TT has done his part....get better 2nd and 3rd string players to combat those injuries. Very few teams have a Rodgers type QB. So if you can develop some depth when injuries do hit, the deeper your playoff runs.

Personally I figure if injuries hit the WR corp again like last year, Green Bay will be better off with having a WR coach to concentrate on developing the young players and making sure the routes will work against their opponent.
Every year something is going to happen: QB loses a few games, O-line loses a few players and the rest play at 50%, you name it has happened (like the Farmers Insurance ad) what you can't do as an organization is crate an issue when you decide to eliminate a coaching position or give play calling to another coach. That's called shooting yourself in the foot. The Packers have to stop that and let their players decide the outcomes.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:56 am

Very fair assessment. Well put.

0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

May 02, 2016 at 07:51 am

For the record...I liked the haul TT pulled in this year. I even think some of the UDFAs will make the team and make a difference later in the year.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

May 02, 2016 at 08:05 am

Gut reactions -

Clark will be a good fit. I don't agree with all of the Raji bashing here in the last 24 hours. I felt like, as a unit, they were better with Raji at NT than anyone else. That said, the more I look at Clark's clips the more I like him.

I loved Spriggs when he was at Indiana. The idea of Bakh moving to OG in 2017 to make way for Spriggs is pure fantasy. Moving him to RT is not if he falters this year. If he continues to improve then it costs $7.8 M in cap space to keep Bulaga in 2017, and $4.8 M to cut him. Hmmm. Spriggs at RT?

I have no feel for Fackrell yet. At age 25 I would think the Packers will have limited patience with his development. Ditto on no feel for Martinez. They both felt like need picks that checked the right box in the right round.

I've been wondering when the Packers would finally get a 5-T for their 3-4 defense. Stop with the arm stuff already; over-rated. Lowry will need a year to work in the weight room. Then look out.

Davis has the speed the Packers need but is too small to be effective on ST as anything other than a returner, and it is not clear that he is great at returning the ball. So I don't know. Feels like Abby is out of a job but who knows.

Murphy will be hidden on the PS.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

May 02, 2016 at 11:37 am

Murphy won't be on the PS.... he'll take Barclay's roster spot.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 11:59 am

I think Spriggs takes Barclay's spot.

Starters
1. Bahk
2. Sitton
3. Linsley
4. Lang
5. Bulaga

Backups
6. Tretter - C, G, T
7. Spriggs - T
8. ?????? - G

In my opinion, Walker and Taylor are fighting for one spot (backup G). I like Walker, but they just gave Taylor a 2 year/$4 million deal. So, who knows.

Murphy is a wildcard. Is he going to be strictly a T or can he backup T and G? If both, maybe he's able to surpass Walker and Taylor. If he's only a T, then I think they'd have to keep 9 OL for him to make it. I could just as easily see Practice Squad.

That's all, of course, assuming everyone is healthy. And it's not even looking at UDFAs.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 12:03 pm

I am just about willing to bet they end up with 9 OL this year.

Tretter, Spriggs, Taylor and Murphy will be the 4 backups.

Tretter and Spriggs are locks. Thompson doesn't like to cut draft picks, so that would keep Murphy. Taylor they resigned to a 2 year deal. They seem to like him and he would be their only pure G on the roster as a backup.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

May 02, 2016 at 08:03 am

Double post.

0 points
0
0
gr7070's picture

May 02, 2016 at 09:23 am

My biggest concern is Rodgers, which even feels funny to type.

I am expecting my concerns to proven misguided, but there is some reason for for the concern.

Rodgers played poorly last year, very poorly. A lot was made of the Nelson injury, but typically a QBs numbers don't suffer when they lose WRs. The great QBs just keep on producing.

Maybe he was hurt, maybe it was an anomole, maybe even the leagues greatest QB (Rodgers) would be affected by no Nelson, an injured Cobb, a worthless Adams, and a nearly worthless TE.

BTW Adams did *not* regress. He was terrible his rookie season. The advanced metrics (see Football Outsiders and numberFire) had him as rather bad his rookie year, too. And that was with an amazing Rodgers and Nelson and great-Cobb. Adams is just not any good.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 08:56 am

"typically a QBs numbers don't suffer when they lose WRs. The great QBs just keep on producing."

How did Brady's numbers look without Gronk?

As you said, it wasn't just losing his #1 receiver. Monty was lost early too. Cobb and Adams were less than 100% all season. The o-line was banged up and underperforming. Lacy was out of shape.

Now, if the offense as a whole wasn't so banged up and Rodgers still performed as poorly as he did, then I'd have concerns. But with so many extenuating circumstances, I'm gonna chalk it up to an anomaly.

0 points
0
0
gr7070's picture

May 02, 2016 at 09:22 am

Brady's numbers have looked (by and large) amazing for his entire career, much of that career with a gaggle of nobodies at WR.

Thanks for mentioning the prime example.

What I'm mentioning (good QBs Stent affected much by WR fluctuations) is not a new concept. This shouldn't upset or shock anyone.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 09:49 am

Tom Brady is all-time great, no doubt.

And, sure, he hasn't had a true stud WR since Moss and maybe Welker, but I think you're discounting perhaps the greatest tight end of all time. Whether it's a WR or TE, I think not having your #1 target will affect a QB.

2015 was a 1 game sample size, but Brady looked like garbage without Gronk in Week 12 against Philly: 29/56, 51%, 312 yards, 3 TDs, 2 INTs, 71.4 rating.

Of course that was just one game. If you look at 2012-2014:

Brady With Gronk: 64.4%, 291 YPG, 7.5 YPA, 5:3 TD/INT
Brady Without Gronk: 58.2%, 247 YPG, 6.7 YPA, 2:1 TD/INT

To look before that: "Since Gronk entered the league in 2010, Tom Brady has been significantly more effective with Gronkowski on the field. Through Week 13 of 2013, Brady has a 78.5 Total QBR with Gronkowski on the field. Brady has a 59.0 QBR without Gronk on the field. Brady has thrown 5.1 touchdowns per interception with Gronkowski on the field. That ratio drops to 2.2 touchdowns per interception with Gronkowski on the sideline."

0 points
0
0
zeke's picture

May 02, 2016 at 10:28 am

Okay, but other than facts and logic what have you got?

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 09:37 am

Rodgers clearly had some sort of injury last year. There was a stretch that he was missing throws that he never misses.

Rodgers wasn't only affect by Nelson. He also dealt with injuries to Cobb & Adams. Also while he wasn't a great player the loss of Andrew Quarless left them with little at TE. He also lost Montgomery who he starting getting a good rapport with.

Add in Lacy being out of shape, the OL being injured. There was a lot more wrong with the offense then just missing Nelson.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 02, 2016 at 09:37 am

We were talking on a previous thread about TTs reliance on the Pac-12 for draft selections. I did a little back-of-the-envelope tabulation and this is what I found.

Over the last 5 drafts (43 picks)....
Big Ten: 9 (20.9%)
Big 12: 3 (7.0%)
PAC 12: 12 (27.9%)
SEC: 4 (9.3%)
ACC: 2 (4.6%)
MWC: 2 (4.6%)
All Others: 11 (25.6%)
So our thoughts are borne out regarding TTs draft selections with nearly half of his draft picks coming from the Big Ten and PAC 12. TT hasn't picked an ACC player since 2012 (Andrew Datko, Terrell Manning) and hasn't selected a player from the "premier conference in college football" (SEC) since 2014 (HHCD).

Curiously, prior to 2011 (his first 6 drafts), TT only picked 6 players from the PAC 12. Some of those were from teams that had not yet joined the PAC 12, like Colorado (I didn't account for those shifts). So his tendencies have shifted. Over that span, he drafted fairly evenly from schools currently in the Big Ten (8 picks), SEC (10), ACC (9), and MWC (7), while 13 of his picks came from the lesser conferences. That SEC number is skewed by the presence of Texas A&M which was playing in the Big-12 at the time.

Just food for thought...

0 points
0
0
gr7070's picture

May 02, 2016 at 10:23 am

By comparison to other NFL teams Ted does not - the comparison part is necessary to actually see if Ted does favor a conference.

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2016-nfl-draft-packers/2016/4/22/11490...

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:32 pm

That's a nice piece. I didn't know it was out there (I wish I did!). That's the perspective that I would not have generated on my own: how does TTs tendency compare to other teams? In a vacuum, TT looks like he prefers the Big Ten and PAC 12 (especially over the last 5 years). Apparently, that's more conservative than the norms. Certainly my numbers picked up the fact that he doesn't tend to draft Big 12 players. He tends to eschew ACC players in that span even more strongly.

Good stuff. Thanks!!

0 points
0
0
gr7070's picture

May 02, 2016 at 10:22 am

.

0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

May 02, 2016 at 10:30 am

Every year is exciting with AR at the helm. I know alot of people have concerns about our future Hall of fame QB. But as RC and Evan have pointed out....our O was a disaster last year for a multitude of reasons. Probably one of the worst offenses we've seen in the AR era. Let's put that in perspective though.
2015: the atrocious AR led offense had Rodgers listed as 7th in QB stats for the year. A few names that beat him are Tom Brady Superbowl winner from the year before. Cam Newton who was absolutely on fire. And a reinvigorated Carson Palmer. If that's ARs worst year we've ever seen, with a beat up squad...... We're still better than 25 other teams at half mast. Can't wait to see a more experienced WR crew, an Oline with more depth, an in shape Lacy, and a new receiving threat TE. Oh...and Rodgers had offseason surgery BTW.
Signed: Rodgers apologist

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

May 02, 2016 at 11:31 am

What I know is that I haven't been this optimistic for a Packers draft class since 2009. I didn't like the Lowry pick much until I saw tape of his play at Standford, but now that I have seen him reek havoc from that spot against a very good Stanford line I'm on board with him as a base 3-4 DE.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

May 02, 2016 at 11:56 am

How do you know that Lowry smells? Have you ever been in his immediate vicinity personally? ;)

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:20 pm

I could smell that havoc over youtube.

0 points
0
0
MITM's picture

May 02, 2016 at 12:03 pm

You heard it here first - If Fackrell turns into the player that the Packers believe he can be, then I would like to take credit for this nickname now. Ghostface Kyler.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 12:37 pm

I expect Packer will win SB, same every year. But if not I will not be sad. Just want to watch them play good to excellent football!

0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:24 pm

It's SB or bust once again this year. Nelson back and a slimmed down Lacey (too slim?). Only one holding us back might be MM.

0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:33 pm

"While Thompson has widely been known for sticking with his board and taking the best player available early in the draft, this year it was obvious that need was a bigger factor." Jason, a good analysis but this sentence is one of those things that drives me crazy; i.e. BAP and Need are somehow MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. You somewhat implied that that is an unusual M.O. for Ted (IMHO). A true BAP drafter fits his board to where he feels his need fits (example Ted trading up for Clay & Spriggs, down for other players (Lacy, Jordy). All good drafting teams do this and I think Ted has shown from his few trades that he does this wisely. Otherwise, a nice article, just a pet peeve of mine in draft discussions.
Thanks for the article!

0 points
0
0
jasonperone's picture

May 02, 2016 at 03:57 pm

There's a point here. The spirit of what I was saying is that the popular narrative is that Ted goes BPA in the early rounds regardless of need. We have seen obvious examples of this not necessarily being the case in the past, I just didn't go into that much depth or detail when I inserted that thought. Now that I think about it, I'm more guilty of not making the point that TT's drafting of Clark was 100% need and nowhere close to BPA. At least as far as we know right now.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 02, 2016 at 05:36 pm

I think Clark was the BPA at DL according to the Packers board. The BPA for the future would have been J. Smith. High risk high reward.

0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

May 03, 2016 at 08:42 am

Disagree with you on the Clark pick, but that is why these are opinion pieces! My point is that BPA INCLUDES NEED. A lot of people don't seem to get that. In his "Ask Vic" column yesterday at Packers.com this was Vic Ketchman's answer to a viewer's comment on the draft, "You could say the draft is about addressing needs and I wouldn’t disagree, but I strongly believe needs must be addressed without leaving your board, or a team will likely regret the reach. Every year we see more trading. It’s because teams are fitting themselves to the pick. When a team has a history of trading up and down, I believe it when the team says it picks the best available player. The Packers are such a team. This was a big-guy draft. That’s where the value was and I wrote it in this column since before the combine. The Packers drafted according to value. I love their draft." It just seems like some people have the perception that BPA and needs are an either/or proposition and that simply isn't true (IMO). Take the Aaron Rodger's pick, in that case the player was so far up the top of the draft board (remember he was thought to go 1 or 2) that Ted pulled the trigger even though Farve (who was constantly talking retirement, granted) was a HOF quarterback.
Sorry for the long post.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:49 pm

Bragging is unbecoming, so please indulge this one time.

Final Bluegrass State draft totals:

Western Kentucky Hilltoppers: 3
Kentucky Wildcats: 1
Louisville Cardinals: 1
Eastern Kentucky Colonels: 1

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

May 02, 2016 at 01:52 pm

A well intentioned shout out to Taryn12 on the Kyler Fackrell pick. Hopefully he's everything you're hoping for.

0 points
0
0
mrtundra's picture

May 02, 2016 at 02:43 pm

We gotta take care of business in the NFC North. Period. 3 losses at Lambeau to division rivals is unacceptable.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 02, 2016 at 03:30 pm

0 points
0
0