CWood21 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 On 8/28/2019 at 3:05 PM, pacman5252 said: Monty wasn't an outright miss. He was pick 94 and is still getting run 5 years after being drafted.In 36 games for us he had 1676 yards from scrimmage (46 a game). For a flex player, that is fairly productive. Not in line with the other players we drafted to play WR, but not a miss by any means. The guy had talent, but had a few injuries and was forced to move around due to our terrible RB situation. He was a whiff. If you're finding a "replaceable" level of player is considered a hit, then it's not much in the way of expectations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, CWood21 said: He was a whiff. If you're finding a "replaceable" level of player is considered a hit, then it's not much in the way of expectations. what percent of 3rd round picks are whiffs would you say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, CWood21 said: He was a whiff. If you're finding a "replaceable" level of player is considered a hit, then it's not much in the way of expectations. Ty is better than a replacement level RB. That game versus Chi wasn't luck. That was elite RB play. He just couldnt take a beating. I fear Aaron Jones may follow a similar path. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, incognito_man said: what percent of 3rd round picks are whiffs would you say? I would assume the hit rate is somewhere around 33% in the 3rd round... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSG Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 2 hours ago, incognito_man said: what percent of 3rd round picks even take a snap in a regular season game? good player =/= good 3rd round pick In the last 20 years Green Bay's 3rd round picks have taken regular season snaps more than 90% of the time. They've had 2 players who didn't take any regular season snaps for the Packers and 1 that didn't take any regular season snaps for anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 1 minute ago, Packerraymond said: Ty is better than a replacement level RB. That game versus Chi wasn't luck. That was elite RB play. He just couldnt take a beating. I fear Aaron Jones may follow a similar path. Availability is absolutely a factor. Do you consider DaVante Parker a bust? Ty Montgomery has significantly less receptions and receiving yards than Ty Montgomery. And his RB production has been on par with Mike Davis as a runner. That's not a hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 13 minutes ago, pacman5252 said: I in general agree with the point you are making. Especially end of third (picks in the 90s where Ty went) you are to do a lot of development players who are out of the nfl in 3-4 years. Ty who, had a few moments and had decent rotational production (averaged 45 yards from scrimmage) performed about to pick expectation. Compared to peers taken around there he was at least middle of the pack. Out of curiousity, here's the 10 guys after Ty Mont (15) in 2015: Matt Jones - 10 Xavier Cooper - 4 Geneo Grissom - 3 Steven Nelson - 13 Paul Dawson - 1 Angelo Blackson - 8 Trey Flowers - 25 Daryl Williams - 20 Bryce Petty - 4 James Sample - 1 Avg: 8.9 And the 10 before him: Henry Anderson - 14 Jeff Heuerman - 4 Chaz Green - 5 Carl Davis - 7 Sean Mannion - 1 Danielle Hunter - 33 Sammie Coates - 4 David Johnson - 31 Tyler Kroft - 5 Jordan Hicks - 22 Avg: 12.6 Of the 21 picks around Ty Mont, he is the 5th or 6th best selection probably. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 8 minutes ago, CWood21 said: I would assume the hit rate is somewhere around 33% in the 3rd round... So hit rate is an absolute and not scaled by round? Seems like a weird system where every GM is back at drafting in the 7th round, then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 Just now, incognito_man said: So hit rate is an absolute and not scaled by round? Seems like a weird system where every GM is back at drafting in the 7th round, then. What? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacman5252 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: He was a whiff. If you're finding a "replaceable" level of player is considered a hit, then it's not much in the way of expectations. I’d argue a replacement level player at 93 that was able to contribute was solid for the spot. You can’t draft someone who doesn’t exist. If you look at our history drafting (or him compared to peers) it’s a lot of meh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, CWood21 said: What? you think there are 33% "hits" in every round? Or just the 3rd? Does the hit/whiff rate adjust by round (compared against draft peers) or is it absolute? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 Just now, incognito_man said: you think there are 33% "hits" in every round? Or just the 3rd? Does the hit/whiff rate adjust by round (compared against draft peers) or is it absolute? No. Just the 3rd round. I think the higher you draft, the more likely you are to hit. The lower, the less chance you have of getting a hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSG Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 10 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Saying they batted near 100 is a bit disengenious. James Jones and Randall Cobb were solid picks, but I'd hardly argue that they were home runs. James Jones and Randall Cobb were solid doubles, but neither are what I'd consider home runs. The other three I'd consider home runs though. But the point still remains, if the Packers sink that much draft capital into the WR position, that's less we're investing elsewhere. What do you want, a stud EDGE or a stud WR? I didn't say they batted close to 100, I said said that Thompson had an 8 year span where he was unconscious when it came to evaluating WRs. They weren't grand slams but they were certainly big time hits. He was talking swings at WRs with top 100 picks regardless of how much talent he had at WR. Keeping Green Bay heavily invested into high end WR talent looked like one of his biggest priorities. The capital that Thompson sank into the WR core was the single biggest reason we won the Super Bowl in 2010. We're not winning that Super Bowl without that WR core. If we're talking next year, I'm taking a WR over an edge in the second. We just sank the #12 pick into the "edge" after spending half a billion dollars on UFA edge guys. We're suffering through the damage that was created by throwing all of our best draft assets at DBs for a 5 year span. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 1 minute ago, SSG said: I didn't say they batted close to 100, I said said that Thompson had an 8 year span where he was unconscious when it came to evaluating WRs. They weren't grand slams but they were certainly big time hits. He was talking swings at WRs with top 100 picks regardless of how much talent he had at WR. Keeping Green Bay heavily invested into high end WR talent looked like one of his biggest priorities. The capital that Thompson sank into the WR core was the single biggest reason we won the Super Bowl in 2010. We're not winning that Super Bowl without that WR core. If we're talking next year, I'm taking a WR over an edge in the second. We just sank the #12 pick into the "edge" after spending half a billion dollars on UFA edge guys. We're suffering through the damage that was created by throwing all of our best draft assets at DBs for a 5 year span. Must be Army, SSG 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 4 minutes ago, SSG said: I didn't say they batted close to 100, I said said that Thompson had an 8 year span where he was unconscious when it came to evaluating WRs. They weren't grand slams but they were certainly big time hits. He was talking swings at WRs with top 100 picks regardless of how much talent he had at WR. Keeping Green Bay heavily invested into high end WR talent looked like one of his biggest priorities. The capital that Thompson sank into the WR core was the single biggest reason we won the Super Bowl in 2010. We're not winning that Super Bowl without that WR core. If we're talking next year, I'm taking a WR over an edge in the second. We just sank the #12 pick into the "edge" after spending half a billion dollars on UFA edge guys. We're suffering through the damage that was created by throwing all of our best draft assets at DBs for a 5 year span. And he drafted at a rate that was quite frankly unsustainable. IF you have any reason to believe that Gute is going to draft at that kind of same success rate, maybe we can begin to start that discussion. But the Packers drafted three #1 WRs. How many teams are still looking for one? But again, you only have so much draft capital to spend. Is spending it on a WR the best plan? Maybe Rodgers isn't as good as we think he is if he can't make do with a 4th round pick instead of a 2nd round pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.