incognito_man Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, pollino14 said: I believe he’s commenting on the people who for some reason give MM and TT all the credit for AR being great. literally no one in the world has ever done that. and literally is used correctly here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOnlyThing Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: That's not even close to being true, and I'm not sure why you're choosing to portray it that way. You look at his draft record and it stands up as well as anyone's, and if you don't think so I'd love to hear why you don't think so. He's got his draft misses (like anyone else), but do you have anything that leads you believe that his hits outweigh his misses? How about compared to league average? If the draft were the only way to acquire players in the NFL, then TT's record would probably stand up to any other NFL GM, especially for the first half of his time in GB (2005-2010). Heck his picks from that time, including the likes of Rodgers, Collins, Jennings, Nelson, Matthews, even Bulaga, were well above average to spectacular. Can the same be said about his picks the past 7 seasons? I don't think so. Furthermore, TT has taken part in veteran free agency less often than every other GM and made no trades of consequence for players since 2010. Hence, he must be above average as a drafter, because he does not make use of free agency/trades like other franchises such as NE. Perhaps the issue is that TT has used so much of his draft stock on the D in recent years and the Defensive coaches are unable to maximize the talents of those players (e.g. Hayward), but the post-SB draft record is just not impressive. I think AR's absence will expose that reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 Just now, TheOnlyThing said: If the draft were the only way to acquire players in the NFL, then TT's record would probably stand up to any other NFL GM, especially for the first half of his time in GB (2005-2010). Heck his picks from that time, including the likes of Rodgers, Collins, Jennings, Nelson, Matthews, even Bulaga, were well above average to spectacular. Can the same be said about his picks the past 7 seasons? I don't think so. Furthermore, TT has taken part in veteran free agency less often than every other GM and made no trades of consequence for players since 2010. Hence, he must be above average as a drafter, because he does not make use of free agency/trades like other franchises such as NE. Perhaps the issue is that TT has used so much of his draft stock on the D in recent years and the Defensive coaches are unable to maximize the talents of those players (e.g. Hayward), but the post-SB draft record is just not impressive. I think AR's absence will expose that reality. Adjust for draft capital. A team picking #1 has a much higher expectation of success than the team picking 32nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said: If the draft were the only way to acquire players in the NFL, then TT's record would probably stand up to any other NFL GM, especially for the first half of his time in GB (2005-2010). Heck his picks from that time, including the likes of Rodgers, Collins, Jennings, Nelson, Matthews, even Bulaga, were well above average to spectacular. Can the same be said about his picks the past 7 seasons? I don't think so. Then let's do an exercise, start a new thread and breakdown the Packers' draft picks compared to other teams that are on a similar level of competitiveness, i.e. New England, Pittsburgh, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOnlyThing Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 Just now, incognito_man said: Adjust for draft capital. A team picking #1 has a much higher expectation of success than the team picking 32nd. Agreed. Might be why a certain franchise in NE that has had even less draft capital than TT has had at his disposal has been far more willing to utilize free agency and make trades for players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 19 minutes ago, pollino14 said: I get it Pugger, I do. People are upset and rightfully so. But there’s a minority of people who do not want to put responsibility on anyone and sit on their hands rather then try to make it better. We can rant but there isn't much we can do to make things better. My sole beef with McCarthy is him keeping Capers around so long. He did eventually can Slocum so perhaps he'll encourage Dom to retire after this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, TheOnlyThing said: Agreed. Might be why a certain franchise in NE that has had even less draft capital than TT has had at his disposal has been far more willing to utilize free agency and make trades for players. yeah sure, and New England doesn't draft nearly as well and have more holes to fill. If NE is your barometer, you are going to be disappointed. I prefer realistic expectations, myself. Removes much of the negative emotion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollino14 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 7 minutes ago, incognito_man said: literally no one in the world has ever done that. and literally is used correctly here. Dude, your whole premise is built on that argument when you said MM and TT are more responsible for our success than AR . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said: Agreed. Might be why a certain franchise in NE that has had even less draft capital than TT has had at his disposal has been far more willing to utilize free agency and make trades for players. If you're using New England as your sole baseline, you're not making a very good argument. They're the model franchise in all of professional sports. If you're going to hold the Packers to that standard, there's 30 other franchises that should be posing that question well before the Packers. Well before the Packers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, pollino14 said: Dude, your whole premise is built on that argument when you said MM and TT are more responsible for our success than AR . Not even close. TT and MM being responsible for the success of the Packers. TT and MM are not wholly responsible for the success of Aaron Rodgers. These are two very, very different things...Stop conflating them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOnlyThing Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 Just now, CWood21 said: Then let's do an exercise, start a new thread and breakdown the Packers' draft picks compared to other teams that are on a similar level of competitiveness, i.e. New England, Pittsburgh, etc. Why would you limit a GM's contribution to the draft, other than to fit an agenda that favors a GM who uses free agency less often than any other and has not made a trade for a player of consequence in over a decade? I mean, how does an exercise limited to the draft account for NE signing Darrelle Revis before winning the SB in 2014? Or trading for multiple players before last season's SB win? Or trading a pick for Cooks this year? And since you are the one who first announced, "You look at [TT's] draft record and it stands up as well as anyone's" and I merely replied to that bald assertion, I suggest you start a new thread to prove the point you were making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeightTheVillain Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 We all agree Aaron is a great, great, great player. One of the reasons for this is his ridiculous TD/INT ratio. Currently sitting #1 all time. This has seemed to be a stress that has followed MM all through out his career. To illustrate.... Aaron Brooks under MM 1.61 TD to INT Ratio Aaron Brooks without MM .32 TD to INT Ratio Favre Last Two Years with Sherman 1.08 TD to INT Ratio Favre First Two Years under MM 1.41 TD to INT Ratio. I did not include his year in SF because it is hard to compare as they had 4 different QBs start games, but it was not pretty for any of them. So hold that against MM if you wish. I also did not include his years as a QB coach in KC because I am not sure how much a role he had in the philosophy of that team, but for those curious, the average of his 4 years there was 1.42. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOnlyThing Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, incognito_man said: yeah sure, and New England doesn't draft nearly as well and have more holes to fill. If NE is your barometer, you are going to be disappointed. I prefer realistic expectations, myself. Removes much of the negative emotion. Well if beating the Bears, Lions, and Vikings is your barometer of success, then enjoy all those NFC North titles. They are undeniable. As for me, my expectation is that with Aaron Rodgers at QB the Packers should compete for Super Bowls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 2 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said: Why would you limit a GM's contribution to the draft, other than to fit an agenda that favors a GM who uses free agency less often than any other and has not made a trade for a player of consequence in over a decade? I mean, how does an exercise limited to the draft account for NE signing Darrelle Revis before winning the SB in 2014? Or trading for multiple players before last season's SB win? Or trading a pick for Cooks this year? And since you are the one who first announced, "You look at [TT's] draft record and it stands up as well as anyone's" and I merely replied to that bald assertion, I suggest you start a new thread to prove the point you were making. Do you have any other points of comparison other than New England? Everyone agrees they are better. There's no point in belaboring that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 1 minute ago, TheOnlyThing said: Well if beating the Bears, Lions, and Vikings is your barometer of success, then enjoy all those NFC North titles. They are undeniable. As for me, my expectation is that with Aaron Rodgers at QB the Packers should compete for Super Bowls. well your expectations have been met for a decade. Why are you complaining? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.