Jump to content

Packers Big Board #9

Packerraymond

By Packerraymond
in Green Bay Packers

Who is #9 on the Packers Big Board?  

55 members have voted

  1. 1. Who is #9 on the Packers Big Board?

    • Vita Vea
      3
    • Leighton Vander Esch
      12
    • Quenton Nelson
      19
    • Mike Hughes
      5
    • Calvin Ridley
      1
    • Roquan Smith
      10
    • Jaire Alexander
      6
    • Taven Bryan
      0
    • Mike McGlinchey
      0
    • Connor Williams
      0

Recommended Posts

Packerraymond

Packerraymond

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 minutes ago, squire12 said:

 

If Nelson plays 5 years with GB as a starter how would that not be a good pick.

I never said a guard at 5 years was a better pick than 5 years at another position.   It is all guess work as to which player at their position will be good.  All I stated was ....

But you're not looking at the opportunity cost. If you take Nelson, he plays 5 years and the Cardinals take Landry and he's an all pro and plays 10 years, that's not a good pick at all. It's a huge mistake and a bad pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
squire12

squire12

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

But you're not looking at the opportunity cost. If you take Nelson, he plays 5 years and the Cardinals take Landry and he's an all pro and plays 10 years, that's not a good pick at all. It's a huge mistake and a bad pick.

Are you looking at it now or in 10 years.

If Nelson is All Pro for 5 years and Landry is out of the league in 4 years, then Nelson was the better pick.

We can play the hindsight game and what ifs all day with this

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacReady

MacReady

Posted
Posted
Just now, squire12 said:

If Nelson is All Pro for 5 years and Landry is out of the league in 4 years, then Nelson was the better pick.

Obviously, and that's why you continue to either not get or straight up neglect the point.

First round guards often don't get second contracts from the team that drafts them.  Even when they're good.  They have a very low percentage of second contracts from teams who draft them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shanedorf

Shanedorf

Posted
Posted

As far as the opportunity cost ....one way to think about it in terms of GB is this:

The Packers have shown consistent ability to get top- end OG play from 4th and 5th rounders

The Packers have not shown consistent ability to get top- end EDGE play from 4th and 5th rounders ( Kampmann/KGB being the exceptions)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vegas492

vegas492

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, HorizontoZenith said:

It's not as simple as saying we pay guards very well.  First, Sherman was a crap GM.  You shouldn't even use Wahle and Rivera as a point.  We lost both of them and a bunch of other players BECAUSE of how much we were paying them.  It was a mistake. 

 

I'll end with this...you are wrong.   Guards can and do get paid.

You are right...many top guards bust.

You are right...paying guards top LT money is a tough pill to swallow.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
squire12

squire12

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Obviously, and that's why you continue to either not get or straight up neglect the point.

First round guards often don't get second contracts from the team that drafts them.  Even when they're good.  They have a very low percentage of second contracts from teams who draft them.

Are you drafting the player for the first contract or the second contract?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Packerraymond

Packerraymond

Posted
  • Author
Posted
25 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

As far as the opportunity cost ....one way to think about it in terms of GB is this:

The Packers have shown consistent ability to get top- end OG play from 4th and 5th rounders

The Packers have not shown consistent ability to get top- end EDGE play from 4th and 5th rounders ( Kampmann/KGB being the exceptions)

Exactly. Positions like RB, OG, ILB, TE have numerous hits in the later rounds and UDFA in the league.

EDGE rushers, CBs and QBs far less success past the top rounds. 

The opportunity cost is what you're giving up using a top 15 pick on a position you currently employ two UDFAs at, and before that had 2 all pros that were day 3 picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacReady

MacReady

Posted
Posted
Just now, squire12 said:

Are you drafting the player for the first contract or the second contract?

First round draft picks are intended to be long term pieces to your team.  Literally every team that drafts a player in the first round wants them to stay with them for a long time.  What is this question? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
squire12

squire12

Posted
Posted
Just now, HorizontoZenith said:

First round draft picks are intended to be long term pieces to your team.  Literally every team that drafts a player in the first round wants them to stay with them for a long time.  What is this question? 

Agreed,   and the % of first round draft picks that bust is still rather high.  So it will ultimately come down to selecting the correct player that deserves a 2nd contract.  Positions matter, but getting the pick correct on the player that is going to be a hit is more important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacReady

MacReady

Posted
Posted
Just now, squire12 said:

Agreed,   and the % of first round draft picks that bust is still rather high. 

I'm working on something that will REALLY jimmy your feathers.  Irrefutable proof.  Standby.  You're about to be proven wrong.  Get ready.  You ready? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacReady

MacReady

Posted
Posted
Just now, vegas492 said:

I'll end with this...you are wrong.   Guards can and do get paid.

Unrestricted free agency began in 1992. 

Let's take a look at first round draft selections from 1992 to 2012.  This will account for modern unrestricted free agency as well as contracts actually coming up (2012 plus five years is now).  Put this to the test compared to other positions. 

Rules:

1. They were drafted as a guard.
2. Drafted in first round.
3. They had to have actually RECEIVED a second contract.  No traded players. 

These rules are intended to eliminate busts.  We're talking solely the rate at which teams re-sign good or semi-good players here to second contracts. 

For the sake of my time, if it becomes abundantly clear at any point that the percentage is significantly

Results:

1. Guard.  17 qualified.  10 did NOT re-sign with the team that drafted them.  59%
TE.  19 qualified.  8 did NOT re-sign with the team that drafted them.  42%
WR.  33 qualified.  11 did NOT re-sign with the team that drafted them.  33%
RB.  31 qualified.  10 did not re-sign with the team that drafted them.  32%
LT.  44 qualified.  11 did NOT re-sign with the team that drafted them.  25%.
QB.  27 qualified (lots of busts).  6 did not re-sign with the team that drafted them.  22%

Still working on this, but I wanted to show what I'm working on.  Not a good look for guards so far. Anybody surprised so far that the three positions I hate most in the first round are 1, 2 and 3 so far?  Almost like I'm onto something or something. 

Well, well, well.  It's almost like NFL salary caps are a real thing and that quarterbacks, left tackles, running backs, receivers and tight ends are all more important to use salary cap space on so far.  Kinda makes you want to consider what positions you use a first round pick on...

Should I do defense next? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...