What? No "What Grade Would You Give To This Draft" Thread Yet?

waiting for the consensus grade board

 

 

All kidding aside, the only thing we can be certain about at this time is just how much this draft screwed over Micah Hyde

I'm starting a ribbon campaign.

This draft comes up a little but short.

 

We got another Hawk and a Kuhn to boot.

 

White people love this draft.

 

Other people? Not so much.

Micah Hyde lost to the draft this weekend. Not sure why Ted hates him. I think the two of them need to talk some things out. 

Soft C.  That's about it.  Some redeeming picks late.  Early it was a cluster **** of reaching and doubling down on hard 19.

Well, I guess that's it, then.

Too much Bud Light on ice and Zima. Clouded judgment.

PackerJoe gets a hard C. Called Jake Ryan and Crockett. Would be higher but Crockett was an UDFA and the sheer amount of tier data to come up with only 2 names. Time might move this grade to a spongy B. 

Was this TT's grade or your high school experience?

But enough about your prom night...

If we're grading on a curve it's Marilyn Monroe.

$pongy....

Its time to grade the 2012 draft.  

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/148997505.html

 

3 guys still on the roster, all of them on a Defense that hasn't been great.  Highest grade I could give it is a C.

Packers moved up to get both Worthy and Manning and a "C" seems extremely generous to me. TT's last two drafts have been very good; the two before that, not so much.  My hope is that his recent winning streak continues. 

B

Addressed the need of replacing both Tramon and House....hopefully improved ST play with the addition of certain guys as well as KR/PR with the Montgomery pick(plus whatever added wrinkle he adds to the offense)

 

Probably not too sexy to most(especially in the media) since they wanted to see them stock up on front 7 guys considering that's been this defense's issue over the years, though things did massively improve over the latter half of the season with the removal of the terrible Hawk/Jones combination.

 

I think the 2018 models are Ford's best yet. A+!

Go back & look at the Niners draft in 2012. Give that one a grade

Juanny freakin' Zamboni.  No midget DB love?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sport...nfl-draft/ar-BBj5EG1

 

These guys are so smert.  Why some team doesn't hire them to do their draft is just plain dum.

 

Grade a Limp D............ick

 

Loser: Brett Hundley

In retrospect, this UCLA product probably should have returned to college for the 2015 season. Seen by some as the third-best quarterback in the draft, Hundley fell all the way to the Green Bay Packers in the fifth round. While that might be a solid long-term fit for Hundley, especially working under Aaron Rodgers, he has no real future as a starter in Green Bay. The early part of Hundley’s career will be all about progressing as a quarterback and displaying his talents in preseason games.

It’s not an ideal short-term situation for the talented signal caller. He would have had a much stronger possibility of playing early in his career if he were drafted by any of the 31 other teams.

some pretty ****ty analysis right there.  He is in a bad situation because he will get excellent mentoring and coaching.  

If someone finds more dum than this article please post link.

Draft winner:

My liver. I only hunkered down 1 night for the draft. Normally old faithful comes out of draft weekend looking like Mrs Mayweather. Easily the draft winner and it's not close. 

 

Draft loser:

Chip Kelly. Chip wanted final personnel decision and got it. Just found out this ain't recruiting. Trying to trade a bunch of starters and picks failed. When Chip was asked about one of those starters (Evan Mathis) rumored to be part of a trade Chip responded with, "He's been available for trade for two years and we've never had an offer". This isn't going to end well. 

I give the draft  C+.  I really like the Rollins and Hundley picks (A's).  I liked the Randall pick (B).  I disliked the Montgomery pick (D).  The others seemed solid (C's).  On paper, this draft doesn't make this team better than last year.  At best, Rollins and Randall can effectively replace Williams and House, and Hundley gives them a legit development QB.  But outside of that, not sure how much the other picks will contribute on offense and defense in the short term.  They're going to rely heavily on the missing players from the 2014 draft classes to significantly improve in 2015 (Goodson, Bradford, Abrederis, Janis, and Thornton) rather than expect the 2015 class to step in and contribute on day 1.  

 

In the long term?  No freaking clue so won't even venture a guess.   

Disagree on Montgomery. If he's the same return guy he was at Stanford its a huge upgrade to flipping starting field position to the past few seasons. I like this pick a lot. 

 

Hundley pick makes sense on several fronts. He's a legitimate back up. He has what you can't teach, accuracy (67% completions) Coaches will fill in the rest. If he progresses the way he should he's got a lot of trade value. That's how I view the pick. A solid backup that GB can flip eventually for better return than a 5th round selection. 

 

Pick I'm quietly excited about. Aaron Ripkowski. I think MM has serious intentions of pounding the ever loving **** out of teams deep in games and deeper into the season. 

Understand your take, I just disagree with the value of spending a 3rd round pick on a kick returner.  As I've posted before, he'll return an average of 2-3 kickoffs per game and at best, will improve on Harris' 20.7 yards per return to 27.5 yards per return (which would have been top 5 last year).  I prefer a 3rd round pick to have more impact than 14-20 yards per game in field position.  

 

And while Montgomery can return punts, I'd be shocked if he replaces Hyde (who was a borderline pro bowler last year with 2 TDs, a 15.8 average, and no fumbles).  Hyde clearly isn't slated to start at CB this year, so no reason to pull from punt return duties.  

 

IMO, Montgomery needs to develop as a WR to live up to a third rounder and I have serious reservations that he can based on what I saw him do in college.  

Uncle Ted hasn't missed on too many WR in rds 2-3.  I wouldn't bet against him.

Fair enough....Obviously TT & crew feel that field position IS worth a late 3rd rounder in (what I believe is) a weak draft.

 

If When this guy runs back a KO for a touchdown or flips Field Position for us....you'll forget all about TT "wasting" a late 3rd on our kick returner.

 

I'm sick of this Lamborghini of an offense starting at the 20 yard line every series

Andrew Luck doesn't agree with concerns Montgomery can't develop into an NFL receiver. He became one of Lucks primary targets as a true freshman culminating with 7 catches for 120 in the 2012 Fiesta Bowl including this...

That team included Zach Ertz and Coby Fleener. Montgomery can play WR. He'll help GB immediately as a returner. I think he carries a lot of value as a 3rd rounder. 

 

On one hand, it's a HS highlight reel. On the other, this is St Marks in Dallas TX so it's not like he's facing children. On the other, other hand. Holy ****!

 

Who are you really going to trust?  Andrew Luck or a random Bears fan on the Intertubes?

 

 

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I like his potential as a kick returner, just disagree with the value of a kick returner in general with the change in rules (ie: a 7 yard difference in starting field position twice a game).  And I don't like his potential as a WR.  I usually defer to TT on his WR scouting since he's been so good, but Montgomery is in direct contrast to previous WR picks.  Jennings, Nelson, Jones, Cobb and Adams were guys without great measurables but were natural pass catcher with a high football IQ, great hands and significant production in college.  Montgomery is literally the opposite.  

 

I really do hope I'm wrong though and he does develop.  I will be cheering for him.  But I think Janis has just as good a chance as Montgomery to develop into a productive WR (that's how raw he is).  And with an offense like this, an average of 7 yards of field position twice per game doesn't seem that valuable.  Now if he can cover the deep guy on a fake FG and do his job on onside kicks.....then we may have something.  

If the assumption is that he's a KR/PR only then yeah it's kind of a waste of a 3rd rounded. I seriously doubt they seem only as a returner there. There's a ton of physical talent to work with, he was well coached in college, and comes from a pro style system with pro style concepts so there's at least a good foundation to work with. Is he any bigger of a project than James Jones was or Jermichael Finlay was in r3? Neither one of them was necessarily ready for primetime coming out of college, they had the foundation for success though.

If he's only a KR/PR on this team and he's an instant improvement then why is that a waste for this team? Who else does GB take at the bottom of the 3rd round that has a bigger immediate impact? I think he brings more to the table than his return skills but Im fine with a luxury pick like this for a team as good as Green Bay is. 

 

I would have loved Walford there. I would have liked Heuerman or Tyler Kroft. 

 

I don't get how a guy that has legitimate potential to immediately help Aaron Rodgers two different ways at the bottom of round 3 in a shallow draft can be viewed as anything but positive.

He's your primary returner (arguably the best in this draft) on KO's and also quite possibly on punts.

 

He quite possibly could be your 3rd string tailback.

 

He can be a gunner on coverage units.

 

He also can line up as a WR on game day even it it's not his primary role.

 

That's a TON of value for a late 3rd round pick.

First of all, the grading system means A = spectacular, C = average, F = terrible.  It's not like the sportswriters who give out 12 A's, 15 B's, 4 C's and save a D for whichever GM/team they don't like.

 

I'd give this Packer's draft a C-.

 

Randall has playmaking ability and did pretty well in the PAC12.  But he's a little guy and who knows how the transition to cornerback will go?  He probably projects best as a nickel back in the NFL.

 

Rollins has excellent ball skills, but does he have enough pure speed to match up against NFL receivers on the outside?  It's the same thing people have been saying about Casey Heyward for months.  There are many comments out there from scouts that see Rollins as a free safety.

 

The Montgomery pick came off as 80% special teams and 20% offense to me.  Montgomery's problem when he plays receiver is that he has a set of stone hands.  But I have no problem with the Packers taking what could be a return specialist this high, maybe it shows that the organization is starting to get serious about special teams play instead of just scapegoating coordinators.

 

Jake Ryan's combine numbers make him look like a bit better athlete than he really is, but he probably won't be asked to cover a whole bunch of space with the Packers.  Knee injury from 2013 is a bit of a concern.  Really intelligent guy who could beat out Barrington right away for a starting spot.

 

All the QBs in this draft were over-rated and that applies to Hundley too.  A fifth and seventh round pick for him seems like pretty fair value.  But he wasn't a steal here, the draft experts over-rated this guy from day one.

 

I'd like the Ripkowski pick more if the Packers did more of lining up in the I formation and just tried to kick the crap out of the opposing team.  But how good with Ripkowski be if he's asked to run the ball and catch the ball in addition to blocking?  Ripkowski had a total of 6 runs, 8 catches, 54 yards from scrimmage and a long play of 9 yards during his 4 years at Oklahoma.  He'll likely need beat out Kuhn for the starting fullback job because it's pretty unlikely the Packer's carry two fullbacks (unless they plan on playing Rodgers under center significantly more which I would be all for).

 

Ringo is interesting but he's another short end that fits as a pass-rusher.  I just don't know if there will be a roster spot for him unless Ted is willing to give up on Thornton or unless defensive line gets hit with the injury bug in training camp.  Have to love this player's production though.

 

Backman was a pure athlete pick, basically wasn't on the radar a few months ago but then ran a 4.65 40, posted a 35 1/2 inch vertical and did the 3-cone in 7.23 seconds during a workout.  He played in the high 250's but dropped a bunch of weight for the workout (was 243 pounds at the time).  Backman can't block but a tight end's blocking has been totally irrelevant to the Packers for about the last 10 years.  The Packers kept Bostick around for quite awhile as an athletic pass-catching tight end prospect, I'd expect Backman to make the roster in that role.

 

In the end I don't think there were any picks that represented great value, and there were no picks that appeared to be a big reach.  Some say that Randall was too high but I had him at #39 on my board of the area of the draft where I expected players to be picked.  He was a solid top 45 player.  Rollins was a mid round two to early round three guy (I thought he's be off the board by #62 which is why I hadn't mentioned him much).  Montgomery fit anywhere from late round three to late round four.  Ryan was anywhere in round four.  Quarterback was such a crapshoot this year,  Hundley, Petty, Grayson...all those guys anywhere from early round three to late round five.

 

So I see this as a pretty average draft across the board, only downgrading it slightly because it relies a bit to much on project picks.  Randall never played cornerback at the major college level, and that's where the Packers are currently planning to play him.  Rollins only played college football for one year.  Montgomery is rock-solid as a return man, but on offense he's more of a gadget player.

 

My one big disappointment in this draft was that there was no offensive lineman selection.  The Packers were very, very close to running out of offensive linemen last year and there was at least one roster spot to be had this year.  The five starters plus Tretter and Barclay are solid, but it wouldn't take very much to win that 8th spot on the roster.  Unfortunately I think the circumstances unfolded in a way that made picking an offensive lineman nearly impossible.  It was remarkable to see where some of these guys went.  I thought there was a fairly decent chance Ty Sambrailo would be available at the Packer's third round pick, he was off the board when the Packer's second round pick came up.  Mitch Morse, saw him as being great value at the end of round four and maybe worth the pick at the end of round three...he went in the middle of round two.  Someone on here (sorry, can't remember who) talked about maybe getting Donovan Smith at the end of round three, he was off the board two picks into round two.  Ereck Flowers at #9, Cameron Erving at #19, Cedric Ogbuehi at #21, Laken Tomlinson at #28, Rob Havenstein at #57, Jamon Brown at #72...this was a wonderful year to be an offensive lineman.  About the only real dropper was T.J. Clemmings, who was probably downgraded in Green Bay because he only has right tackle experience.  It's too bad the Packers got dealt with this hand when it came to the offensive linmen prospects, I wonder if Ted was in the market and this became a disappointment to him as well.

 

 

 

 

I'll let Ted know you're not thrilled with his work.

There's no guarantee that Monty will be able to handle PR and KR in the NFL, Corey Rodgers was a pretty good returner in college also. That's why I don't think they drafted him ONLY for his return skills, he was picked because of his potential as a WR...the return ability just increased his value and made it an easy decision. Because of that it wasn't a wasted pick. Just because he's not necessarily a good WR now doesn't mean he won't ever be, like I said he has the foundation.

Nothing in the draft is guaranteed. If I'm wrong I'll own it. I just think he's a really good pick at that spot given who was available for his ability to make this Packer team better.