Scoremore Posted May 7 Share Posted May 7 Drafted way too early according to just about everybody. Even a Mizzou journalist said the same. Therefor, he's going to be a hell of a player. He's #59 Campbell's old number even looks like him on the field. Hopium... or he's a massive reach and will go the way of Oren Burks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrILL! Posted May 7 Share Posted May 7 3 hours ago, HokieHigh said: Over/under hoppers career compared to abdul hodge Over 24 minutes ago, Scoremore said: or he's a massive reach and will go the way of Oren Burks... Starting for the Niners in the playoffs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 It genuinely feels like people were confused about LB ratings in the draft because: - Nobody in the media knew that Payton had a medical issue that would keep him off a number of NFL teams boards (the lack of an ACL in one knee). - People thought Jeremiah Trotter Jr. could play in the NFL because of his name. -Many people don't understand that the Packers are always looking for a value in a guy who played worse last year than the previous year if they can explain what was going on there, because the draft media is always just looking at the last year. But for my money Liufau was much more overdrafted than Hopper, but also both picks were fine. A thing we should have understood as soon as the Packers hired Hafley is that they were going to draft at least one LB much higher than anybody would expect since that was the room that needed the most work to change what kind of defense they were going to play. Like the basic issue is that previously they would sometimes play 3 different DTs, whereas now they instead play 3 ILBs instead. This was *always* going to be the position they would "reach" at (whatever that means.) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uffdaswede Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 7 hours ago, HokieHigh said: Over/under hoppers career compared to abdul hodge Was anyone else over at JSO’s “forum” (French for sh!+show) when Abdul Hodge’s ex came looking for him? Like one of us rubes pounding away at the keyboards was letting him crash on our couch. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 hour ago, PossibleCabbage said: Many people don't understand that the Packers are always looking for a value in a guy who played worse last year than the previous year if they can explain what was going on there, because the draft media is always just looking at the last year This is missed every year even by us. We should focus on that next draft. I agree this is something our FO has done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 18 minutes ago, incognito_man said: This is missed every year even by us. We should focus on that next draft. I agree this is something our FO has done. I think this is always going to happen because actual NFL professional scouts take notes, whereas most of the rest of everybody just watches games. It's already hard for people who do not work for NFL teams to get film from last year, so getting it two years later is also a really hard ask. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 6 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said: I think this is always going to happen because actual NFL professional scouts take notes, whereas most of the rest of everybody just watches games. It's already hard for people who do not work for NFL teams to get film from last year, so getting it two years later is also a really hard ask. yeah, the amount of hours that NFL scouts put in is significant relative to draftnik types. They are watching games, going to practices, talking to college coaches and have a pretty good handle on how the next 1-2 years draft classes might be weak/strong at different positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReasonablySober Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 20 hours ago, incognito_man said: Applying this logic, there should be no RBs, S, TE or ILBs drafted in the first 3 rounds? I explained it. I didn't mind going S and ILB on day two. I would have been fine with Bullard at #25. It was double shortly after Cooper and Bullard were taken when other quality prospects at different positions were available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 A guy's overall record is a composite of multiple small decisions, and even a great drafter will have bad decisions mixed in with the good ones. We all get that, and any of Hopper, Williams, and Kitan might be bad. Still, whenever management makes unexpected decisions, I like to especially listen to them to try to understand their unexpected logic. I re-listened to the post-draft press conferences last night. Gute was asked about doubling up, in reference to two ILB and three safety picks. He said they thought twice on some of those picks, having already drafted from position group; but they decided to stay true to their board. 2nd, (in response to different question), he acknowledged that need can act as a tiebreaker. 3rd, he acknowledged team needs might have subconsciously impacted how they'd built their board. What struck me was that having already taken Cooper and Bullard, that actually made them hesitate about picking ILB or safeties again later, and he needed to give himself the "stick to your board" self-reminder in order to double(triple?) dip. (Not clear, of course, whether that alluded to one, two, or all three of the Hopper, Williams, or Kitan picks.). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R T Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 With the selections of Cooper and Hopper the Packers selected no less than two of their top 5 LBers in this class, might even be their top 2. Or two of the top 3 or two of their top 4, but without a doubt two of the top 5. Also, without a doubt their top one in Cooper. Yet because Hopper was viewed as lower by the public the pick has been talked into it being a 'reach'. So much so that it is an absolute in many people's minds now and certainly the player could have been drafted rounds later. Some will complain about it even after the player is long gone. The odds are on those people's side that it is a bad pick because 75-80 percent of all draft choices don't receive a second contract whether they were a good pick according to the consensus or not. One of the main reasons the Packers may have doubled down on day 2 is that they don't fully trust Cooper. If Cooper would have checked all the off the field boxes, he probably finds himself in the 1st round, but he doesn't and he didn't. Most are going to be all over the Cooper pick, but it is probably around 50/50 on which LB might get a second contract in 4 years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 As always, most fans treat the media draftnick boards as gospel when it comes to value/reach picks. It's never going to change, 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 2 hours ago, ReasonablySober said: I explained it. I didn't mind going S and ILB on day two. I would have been fine with Bullard at #25. It was double shortly after Cooper and Bullard were taken when other quality prospects at different positions were available. so really it's an issue with the person and not the position, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted May 8 Author Share Posted May 8 1 hour ago, Mazrimiv said: As always, most fans treat the media draftnick boards as gospel when it comes to value/reach picks. It's never going to change, And more often than not they're correct to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReasonablySober Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 hour ago, incognito_man said: so really it's an issue with the person and not the position, correct? No, it's the positions. If it was the person my gripe would be Hopper over Wilson or Williams over Hicks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 hour ago, ReasonablySober said: No, it's the positions. If it was the person my gripe would be Hopper over Wilson or Williams over Hicks. so if we had taken Hopper in the 2nd, you wouldn't have liked us taking Cooper at Hopper's pick either? 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.