Tom Oates: Draft unlikely to provide the help Packers need

[TW]

A lot of insightful comments on how people see how we stand, with the FA losses. It's so difficult evaluating where we'll be, before the draft, and before we see how second year players shake out after the OTAs. Some guys, who looked horrible in year one, look like world beaters after they get a full year under their belt.

Some guys come along a little slower, but when the potential is there, it ends up coming through. Example... Bakhtiari. I honestly thought he was a weak link, but watching him play last year, he was Pro Bowl material.

As ticked as I am about some of the Packer picks, and guys they let go, I keep seeing guys they grabbed in drafts, and through FAs, making the grade, and ending up a viable part of the team.

My problem is that the formula we're seeing from the Packers is that they do enough reorganizing and revamping to win games, but not quite enough to get over the hump, and win the big ones, like the Patriots. I think it's a combination of both coaching, and the ability to spot what talent blends in best, with the talent you already have. We just aren't in a league with the Pats, and that's frustrating, because I believe that based on pure native talent, Rodgers is a better QB than Brady. The Packers just don't have the insight to put together what has to be there, to win it all.

 

[Cheesedog]

The whole article is opinion. An opinion shared by some, not shared by others. So let's look at the FACTS:

Shields- replace what? He wasn't even there! Yes we need CB help.
Julius Peppers- 23 tackles, 7.5 sacks. Really not a difference maker.
TJ Lang- toughest to line up stats for and probably the toughest to replace.
JC Tretter- Back up OL. BACK UP lineman. As in off-the-bench.
'Fat' Eddie Lacy- 5 games played. 360 yds rushing, 28 yards receiving. His career stats went down each year. 267 lbs coming off of an ankle injury.
Cook- Missed 6 games. Could have come back. Green Bay offered a decent contract. Agent over played their hand. Signed for much less with the Raiders.
D Jones- 1 sack. You can talk about his pressures, but what most remember is his bone headed penalties to keep the opposition on the field.
Hyde- 4 Ints in 19 games. 12 passes defended. Couldn't find how many first downs he allowed.

IMO- this group (sans Lang- and that's a guard) is more than replaceable. House is better than an absent Shields. Bennett is better and more reliable than Cook.
I think this off season is precariously balanced and people will see it with their preconceived inclinations. Personally, Lang is loss that concerns me, the others? Not much there that we lost.

Devils Advocate time

Shields wasn't around and it showed...

Peppers was second on the team in sacks behind Perry, he had more sacks that golden boy CMIII....

Lang - replacements are downgrade..

Tretter - was depth.. we are now even less injuries away from disaster...

Lacy - no real loss

Cook - lateral movement, so stand pat

Jones - no big loss

Hyde - House is at best equal....

 

[Terranimal]

The key to all of this imo is difference makers not replacing players with players for holes.

Look at what type of players we lost and their replacements....Collins a special Pro Bowler lost to injury and took seasons and picks to grab Dix who is coming in his own now. However had we signed a vet that year, the pick could have went elsewhere.

Woodson another Problem Bowler and team leader and let go 3 seasons too soon. Hayward was suppose to take that role over and wasn't in the same league as CW and later lost to FA.

TW another former PB player who had looked to have lost a step and was gone. That was fine but then we list both Hayward and House who were suppose to the replacements. Result? Reached with first two picks on a Safety to convert and an inexperienced player and have yet to pan out.

OLB....spent a lot picks and only one to be an impact was Matthews and he's older now.

Finley lost to injury and have yet to replace him.

So it's not a matter of replacing players and filling holes. It's the lack of difference makers and overall team speed. Passing over players that could improve team to opt for lower rated or reaching to fill holes for need. Of course this is directly related to lack of use of free agency. The Pat's are the blueprint.

Imo this why we are always in the hunt and competitive, but why we don't make it to the next level as the Pat's have done on a consistent level.

Of course some luck plats a part also and won't even get into the injuries, but this team should have been to at least 2 more Super Bowls with Rodgers already.

 

[mzahn]

I am still bummed about Capers coming back.

 

[diesel]

"SKY IS FALLING CROWD" give me a break ..... It's only pessimistic if GB is playing in the NFC title game again or Super bowl. You once again have to have that perfect storm and get on a roll late etc. Every draft is a crap shoot in that these guys have to pan out 3/4 yrs from now not year 1.

TT/MM tend to want their rookies to contribute early and often which again is a crap shoot... get key injuries that our season ending and rookies that are not up to par

Point being > A. in reality you don't grade this draft until 4 yrs down the line. B. It's an off season pre-draft article designed to get you to click.. you did so mission accomplished.

The Sky is Crying... Great blues song!

 

[salmar80]

I hate analysis that disregards the '"develop" -part of draft and develop. As if young guys stayed the same from year to year, and only way to improve a roster is from without.

It's sure not sexy or easy to project what, say, Randall, Fackrell, Martinez and Ryan can be, but it just may be the holes of yesteryear are no such thing this season.

Also, thinking about draft picks in terms of needs and instant production is lazy simplifying of what the draft is about. You pick PROSPECTS, and if they can play day one it's a plus, should not be the expectation.

If this team makes it to the SB, we'll look back and see how several youngsters made a jump. Some expected, some surprising.

 

[TW]

Salmar pointed out something that is essential. The growth of players who are entering their second year, and in some cases, their third. If they do gel, and become solid contributors, this team could be a contender.

The question is, who will and won't become a viable member of the team? I'm anxious to see how this plays out too.

 

[TW]

TW another former PB player who had looked to have lost a step and was gone. That was fine but then we list both Hayward and House who were suppose to the replacements. Result? Reached with first two picks on a Safety to convert and an inexperienced player and have yet to pan out.

Excellent points! It's a difficult decision, as to whether or not it's time to part company with some of these guys. I would hope the decision to cut these strings would be mainly due to the feelings of the coaching staff, not the GM. The coaches should know what these guys still have in the tank.

I always question if that's the direction it goes, or is Thompson overriding the opinions of coaches????

 

[Half Empty]

I hate analysis that disregards the '"develop" -part of draft and develop. As if young guys stayed the same from year to year, and only way to improve a roster is from without.

It's sure not sexy or easy to project what, say, Randall, Fackrell, Martinez and Ryan can be, but it just may be the holes of yesteryear are no such thing this season.

Also, thinking about draft picks in terms of needs and instant production is lazy simplifying of what the draft is about. You pick PROSPECTS, and if they can play day one it's a plus, should not be the expectation.

If this team makes it to the SB, we'll look back and see how several youngsters made a jump. Some expected, some surprising.

I'm in the camp that believes the 'develop' just isn't/can't be the tool it once was. The CBA went to great lengths to make sure the new millionaires don't have to work too hard or too often. Of course, I'm a pre-Lombardi fan and always enjoyed the stories about how it was a relief to play in games because they were so much easier than practices.