Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dll2000

Who had best draft?

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, HuskieBear said:

yup. my buddy's dad has worked for the packers for 20+ years in a position very close to the players, so between the two of them i've heard some stories. Lacy is also dumber than a box of rocks

Give us more :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll stick to the division based only on the players themselves(not including trade value or anything like that).

1) Bears
The positive: The only better than getting 3 immediate starters in any given draft is getting 3 immediate starters who upgrade 4 different positions in one swipe! A pass rusher may have been a big need but so was alot of other holes and you can't expect everything to be fixed in one year. 

The negative: As excited as I am to see where Miller is at in 2 years......part of me is still reminds myself that this is the same Bears team who has been unable to develop a WR since Marty Booker 20 years ago(Knox sort of). I know that this isn't a real negative but it is an unfortunate reality of being a disgruntled Bears fan.

2) Packers
They needed help in the secondary and at WR and got both. King, Jackson and Alexander are going to be a nightmare in Pettine's sub-packages. I have learned to not even question the Packers ability to develop WR's anymore. Out of the three they drafted, don't be surprised if one of them makes the pro-bowl in 2019. 

3) Vikings
A good defense got better and younger with Hughes who will probably beat out 79 year old Newman for PT in sub-packages and eventually replace Waynes after he hits FA when his rookie contract is up next year.

4) Lions
I don't care for their draft as a whole. I get they that haven't had a rushing threat since Barry but taking Johnson as early as they did......I wouldn't be too happy about that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

Before the draft I remember him saying he was hoping to play in a warm weather city because of his asthma. At least it doesn't get too cold in Green Bay or anything.

 

How about finding him a real RB? Or a real TE? How about a proper offensive line?

No disagreement at all about their OL which they regularly neglect, but in the last 5 seasons GB has finished no lower than 20th in rushing yards, and in the top 12 three times. Lack of offense is far from their problem. They are perennially in the top 25% of the league in scoring when Rodgers has been healthy. If they could draft defense worth a damn at all they’d be a juggernaut. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

No disagreement at all about their OL which they regularly neglect, but in the last 5 seasons GB has finished no lower than 20th in rushing yards, and in the top 12 three times. Lack of offense is far from their problem. They are perennially in the top 25% of the league in scoring when Rodgers has been healthy. If they could draft defense worth a damn at all they’d be a juggernaut. 

20th in rushing yards because their QB is such a threat. Again, don't you think he ever gets sick of having to make these guys into good to great players, or don't you think he wishes they'd take a top notch playmaker for once, someone that could make his life easier, rather than vice versa? Don't you think he would have been excited had they traded up to #2 for Barkley?

I don't necessarily agree on the defense. All they need is a top 15 defense and offensive playmakers and they'll crush it, but if the defense is the plan, the way to do it isn't drafting corners rather drafting pass rushers who could make life easier for those corners. I believe Alexander, King and Jackson would have a much easier transition if they had to cover for 3-4 seconds rather than 6-8.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Funny how teams like GB, Seattle and Denver had these monster drafts that gave them all this star power and won titles and then mostly same decision makers went on a run of mostly bad drafts that brought them down to Earth.

Draft can be as much luck as genius.  You start thinking you have a formula and realize that you are dealing with human beings with lots of variables.  Too many to quantify.  And even if you are right about someone what is true one year can be radically different another.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by dll2000
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

20th in rushing yards because their QB is such a threat. Again, don't you think he ever gets sick of having to make these guys into good to great players, or don't you think he wishes they'd take a top notch playmaker for once, someone that could make his life easier, rather than vice versa? Don't you think he would have been excited had they traded up to #2 for Barkley?

I don't necessarily agree on the defense. All they need is a top 15 defense and offensive playmakers and they'll crush it, but if the defense is the plan, the way to do it isn't drafting corners rather drafting pass rushers who could make life easier for those corners. I believe Alexander, King and Jackson would have a much easier transition if they had to cover for 3-4 seconds rather than 6-8.

 

I didn’t say their approach to how they address the defense is what I would do or what they should do. I’m with you that they should have keyed on pass rush. As to the running game, of course he’d rather have an elite RB than an average one, but what matters is the production. They’re getting it without an elite player at an adequate level most times and an above average leve other times. The Rodgers Effect on the run game will be there no matter who is there. My point is that with the offense as it is even without a top RB is an elite unit and has been for years, and because of that I don’t begrudge their approach of not throwing additional top draft resources at the position. Nobody wins the SB with an elite offense without at least a solid defense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

I'll stick to the division based only on the players themselves(not including trade value or anything like that).

1) Bears
The positive: The only better than getting 3 immediate starters in any given draft is getting 3 immediate starters who upgrade 4 different positions in one swipe! A pass rusher may have been a big need but so was alot of other holes and you can't expect everything to be fixed in one year. 

The negative: As excited as I am to see where Miller is at in 2 years......part of me is still reminds myself that this is the same Bears team who has been unable to develop a WR since Marty Booker 20 years ago(Knox sort of). I know that this isn't a real negative but it is an unfortunate reality of being a disgruntled Bears fan.

2) Packers
They needed help in the secondary and at WR and got both. King, Jackson and Alexander are going to be a nightmare in Pettine's sub-packages. I have learned to not even question the Packers ability to develop WR's anymore. Out of the three they drafted, don't be surprised if one of them makes the pro-bowl in 2019. 

3) Vikings
A good defense got better and younger with Hughes who will probably beat out 79 year old Newman for PT in sub-packages and eventually replace Waynes after he hits FA when his rookie contract is up next year.

4) Lions
I don't care for their draft as a whole. I get they that haven't had a rushing threat since Barry but taking Johnson as early as they did......I wouldn't be too happy about that.

 

How can you say that and then mention Knox but not mention Alshon Jeffrey?  I know we all hate him around here these days but theres no doubt that he's a pretty high-tier WR.   

Either way, we are realistically going to be looking at Miller as a #2/#3 guy, not a #1 since we have Allen Robinson.  If you look at players we have developed at WR, we have a few that have been developed "in house" would fit well in the #2/3 WR category at a minimum.  From memory since the 06 super bowl, we've developed Bernard Berrian, Johnny Knox, Alshon Jeffery, Cam Meredith, Earl Bennett, and arguably Devin Hester as a "role" guy who obviously couldn't be a number 1 but I think in the right situation where he wasn't the sole threat on the field could have been a pretty decent slot guy.  Maybe not a ton, but I certainly wouldn't say Marty Booker is the last one.  

Also, It doesn't really matter.  We have a new coaching staff.  "Clean slate" in that it doesn't matter if we didn't do it in the past, its not as if we wont be able to now because we are the Bears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, TankWilliams said:

How can you say that and then mention Knox but not mention Alshon Jeffrey?  I know we all hate him around here these days but theres no doubt that he's a pretty high-tier WR.   

Either way, we are realistically going to be looking at Miller as a #2/#3 guy, not a #1 since we have Allen Robinson.  If you look at players we have developed at WR, we have a few that have been developed "in house" would fit well in the #2/3 WR category at a minimum.  From memory since the 06 super bowl, we've developed Bernard Berrian, Johnny Knox, Alshon Jeffery, Cam Meredith, Earl Bennett, and arguably Devin Hester as a "role" guy who obviously couldn't be a number 1 but I think in the right situation where he wasn't the sole threat on the field could have been a pretty decent slot guy.  Maybe not a ton, but I certainly wouldn't say Marty Booker is the last one.  

Also, It doesn't really matter.  We have a new coaching staff.  "Clean slate" in that it doesn't matter if we didn't do it in the past, its not as if we wont be able to now because we are the Bears.

Jeffery is dead to me Tank. He's been stricten from all Bears history as far as I'm concerned, so he don't count in my book. The others you mentioned couldn't hold a candle to Knox and what he could've have become. Berrian slipped my mind but he was also a one-trick pony. Bennett was never going to be anything more than a serviceable/situational WR with good hands at best. I do agree however, about Hester--he could have been a very solid slot guy to use in space but never reached those heights. It's just too bad that Turner was too stupid to see it(other than 13 screens a game).

But you're right, it's not as bad as I made it out to be.

I'm also expecting more out of Miller and less out of Robinson in the future than most seem to be. Most fans seem to look at Robinson as someone who is going to hold down the #1 spot for the next 4-5 years and I don't (mainly because of injury concerns). If we get 2 productive years out of his 3 year contract, that'll be a success, IMO. Meanwhile, Miller has the potential to be a true #1 and not just a 2 or 3. 
  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2018 at 1:15 PM, beardown3231 said:

How about finding him a real RB? Or a real TE? How about a proper offensive line?

Tauscher, Bakhtiari, Taylor, Linsley, Wells, Clifton, College, Bulaga, Lang, Sitton.....all probably have a combined 10-15 pro-bowls under their belts.

The Packers have had one of the best OL's in league for a long time now. 

20 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

Don't you think he would have been excited had they traded up to #2 for Barkley?

They don't need too. Jones and Williams showed last season that they're a very capable 1-2 punch.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Tauscher, Bakhtiari, Taylor, Linsley, Wells, Clifton, College, Bulaga, Lang, Sitton.....all probably have a combined 10-15 pro-bowls under their belts.

The Packers have had one of the best OL's in league for a long time now. 

They don't need too. Jones and Williams showed last season that they're a very capable 1-2 punch.  

Tauscher- 0 Pro Bowls

Bakhtiari- 1

Taylor- 0

Linsley- 0

Wells- 1

College- 0

Lang- 1

Bulaga- 0 (and is always hurt)

Sitton- 3

That’s 6, not 10-15. You named 9 players and they have 6 Pro Bowls between them. How impressive. The Packers OL sucks. Don’t be ridiculous. 

Jones had 80 carries last year (and 1 arrest), and Williams averaged 3.6 ypc on 150 carries. Not sure what you saw or what conclusion anyone can make on that few of carries.

If you’re honestly trying to defend the Packers FO for their efforts to give Rodgers necessary weapons & protection and their efforts to provide the defensive coaching staff with good players at the most important positions, you’re just wrong. They’re good with Rodgers and abysmal without him, in large part because of their rather untalented roster outside of Adams, Daniels, Rodgers, Bahktiari, and (somewhat) Wilkerson + Graham.

Edited by beardown3231

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

That’s 6, not 10-15. You named 9 players and they have 6 Pro Bowls between them. How impressive. The Packers OL sucks. Don’t be ridiculous. 

Now do that with every other team in the league in the last 10 years.

Anyone claiming that Rodgers has not had a good OL is kidding themselves. In fact, that argument is so one sided it's not even worth debating. 

TM # of PB Players PB Combined
NOR 8 15
DAL 6 19
GNB 6 8
NYJ 5 14
PHI 5 13
MIA 4 9
DEN 4 7
SEA 4 5
CAR 3 11
PIT 3 10
WAS 3 9
BAL 3 8
NYG 3 8
NWE 3 7
HOU 3 6
OAK 3 6
BUF 3 5
TEN 3 5
MIN 3 4
TAM 3 4
CLE 2 12
SFO 2 9
CHI 2 4
LAC 2 4
ATL 2 3
KAN 2 3
CIN 1 3
IND 1 2
ARI 1 1
DET 1 1
LAR 1 1
JAC 0 0

 

And just as a side-note. The pro-bowl itself is a joke and is largely based on name recognition. The point is, not too many teams in the league have had as many solid to very good OL players than the Packers have had in Rodgers' tenure.

7 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

Jones had 80 carries last year (and 1 arrest), and Williams averaged 3.6 ypc on 150 carries. Not sure what you saw or what conclusion anyone can make on that few of carries.

Because I'm not just looking at raw numbers. I'm looking at situational plays, their skill sets, how they were utilized under the least optimal conditions  and how the offensive operated before their injuries (with and without Rodgers mind you), etc, etc. Which btw, using Williams' 3.6 YPC is box score scouting at it's worst seeing as how he is best fit as a short yardage back and still managed to average 4.6 Y/T with Hundley behind center. Saying they should've traded up for Barkley is not even a rational suggestion. 

7 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

If you’re honestly trying to defend the Packers FO for their efforts to give Rodgers necessary weapons & protection and their efforts to provide the defensive coaching staff with good players at the most important positions, you’re just wrong. 

Rodgers has had plenty of weapons and protection over the years. Suggesting otherwise is ridiculous. 

Quote

They’re good with Rodgers and abysmal without him

That's usually how it works with a QB like Rodgers.

Edited by JustAnotherFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to take this moment to say FTP and that offensive line gets away with ridiculous amounts of holding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Anyone claiming that Rodgers has not had a good OL is kidding themselves. In fact, that argument is so one sided it's not even worth debating. 

I'll debate you both, actually. :)  Rodgers has had average to above average lines for the most part. I'd qualify a couple of them as "very good", but that's about it.

3 hours ago, G08 said:

I'd just like to take this moment to say FTP and that offensive line gets away with ridiculous amounts of holding.

The refs are doing what they're usually doing--making sure defenders don't sneeze on Rodgers, or look at him funny. Which means they miss a lot of other stuff. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a really weird feeling being a die hard Bears fan but knowing Aaron Rodgers is the best QB I have ever seen in my life and I actually enjoy watching him play. So bizarre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, G08 said:

It's a really weird feeling being a die hard Bears fan but knowing Aaron Rodgers is the best QB I have ever seen in my life and I actually enjoy watching him play. So bizarre.

He is must watch TV, and if he played for almost any other team, he might be my favorite player of all time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×