PDA

View Full Version : Best draft in the division.


TitleTown088
04-27-2008, 06:16 PM
Well who is it?
I 'm a bit torn between the Bears and Green Bay personally. I think they both had good drafts but GB may have blown it in the later rounds.

Detriot, not too thrilled with their picks aside from Smith

The Vikings had good picks, but just not enough of them due to the trade.

Yatta!
04-27-2008, 06:26 PM
I don't think anyone in the division had a great draft. The Bears had some nice pickups in the early rounds and filled most of their needs (excluding QB, which is surprising) so I voted for them.

princefielder28
04-27-2008, 06:28 PM
With the picks that the Vikings had remaining, I think they got the best value for each pick

bearsfan_51
04-27-2008, 06:35 PM
I'm not sure the Vikings can even be put in the discussion, since it's hard to compare Allen to a bunch of rookies (and all of the money they spent).

The Lions are out of the equation. They made a few solid moves but I'd be hard pressed to grade them higher than a C+

The Packers? Eh. I liked the Lee pick. Brohm was great value, but what will that be worth? It's a good pick because you don't know what you'll get from Rodgers.

I guess what I'm saying is that it's almost impossible to vote for the Packers over the Bears, because the Bears rookies are going to contribute a lot more. Some of that is because the Packers are a better team than the Bears. Some is because the Bears had higher picks. Others is because the Packers made a couple of picks that were with depth and special teams in mind. Kinda hard to get a top grade from that, but it's solid nonetheless.

bearfan
04-27-2008, 06:37 PM
Vikes, I count Allen as a pick for them. They also got some quality players there on out who could get some PT.

If Millen were smarter, they would have the best drafts every year IMO b/c they are pretty agressive, and move up to some good spots after round 1. Thats if he were smart lol

Crazy_Chris
04-27-2008, 06:39 PM
I think the Bears had a very nice draft class.

The Legend
04-27-2008, 06:41 PM
Bears without a doubt in my mind
they got ther LT, RB, WR
got a NT that will be nice next ot Harris
a good back safety
Zack Bowman and when he gets healthy that 4 cb will be great
that will really help that vs packers 5 wr

lol how do the Vikings get 3 votes they got a good safety and 2 back ups

regoob2
04-27-2008, 07:09 PM
Even with Jared Allen the Vikes didn't add anyone who's gonna see any significant playing time other than ST.

TitleTown088
04-27-2008, 07:42 PM
Even with Jared Allen the Vikes didn't add anyone who's gonna see any significant playing time other than ST.

Tyrell could potentially push Sharper for the starting spot. It wouldn't surprise me one bit, Sharper is losing it.

TitleTown088
04-27-2008, 08:56 PM
Has it been so long since the Bears had a good QB that they forgot they need one?

With that said they didn't have too many opportunities to speak of especially if they disliked Booty like BF says... However I just don't see how they believe they can continue with what they got. Who knows? Perhaps Rexy turns er all around this year.

neko4
04-27-2008, 09:00 PM
I felt the Bears did a very good job. I like Williams and Matt Forte has been my fave RB for the longest time.

sweetness34
04-28-2008, 12:34 AM
Yea I'm not usually one to say our team had a really good draft, but on paper I thought we did very well. Sometimes I'll sit and watch who we pick and at first be like "WTF?" then kinda settle back into it and say, "well, maybe he'll be better than I think."

This year I didn't do that with any of the picks. I kinda was confused on Davis but after reading up on him, the upside on this guy is pretty impressive.

If Bowman, Harrison, and Steltz pan out like they could, this draft could be one to remember down the line.

Love the Williams, Forte, and Bennett picks. Also like Monk and the two OL's we got int he 7th. Harrison is a risk/reward player, as is Bowman. But both at one time were graded as first/high second round tier prospects with very high upside. And it's usually not like Angelo to take a risk on a guy in the middle rounds of the draft. He usually goes safe and for the system, so it was good to see him take a chance.

Of course in a year we could all look back and say, what the **** were the Bears thinking? :D

Maybe Next Year Millen2
04-28-2008, 10:31 AM
I'd have to go with the Bears. Forte is the top second tier back IMO(over Rice,Johnson,Kevin Smith) and Williams fixes a big need at tackle. Harrison replaces Tank, which is why the defense wasn't typical Bears D last year. They didn't have a good NT. They got some decent WRs too and very good value later on.

Vikes were probably second because they got the most impactful player out of every team with Jared Allen.

The Lions draft wasn't that awful, I'd give it at least a B, but it was pretty much a worst case scenario in Round 1 with the way the board fell(and we couldn't trade up because we have so many holes). We made the best out of a bad situation. A situation that is crap for Lions fans because we were 7-9 like all the other 7-9 teams but had to pick last. We needed defense badly, but when there were none at 15, we did the correct thing to trade down. I like Cherilus more than Otah and Brandon Albert has only played two games total at tackle. He only projects to tackle. Moving down allowed us to get Kevin Smith by moving up in the 3rd. If we don't do that this draft is an F because we would have missed out on the second tier RBs and going skill player in Round 1 with Mendenhall just wasn't an option. Bears grabbed Forte which we couldn't do anything about, Chris Johnson went way too early and we still needed defense after taking offense in Round 1. So we went with our only questionable pick in Dizon. Marinelli/Barry obviously like him though, he fits the Cover 2 more than Dan Connor and called the plays in Colorado(which was the biggest reason we drafted him). Round 3 was very good for the Lions. Kevin Smith gives us that runner and Fluellen at backup DT and Avril(3rd down rusher) fills some big holes on D.

Packers got solid players. Jordy Nelson was a head sctacher, Brohm puts pressure on Rodgers but it makes the Pack better overall having two solid QB potential.

bearsfan_51
04-28-2008, 11:36 AM
The only real pick I question with the Lions is Dizon. I'm not a huge fan of the Cherilus pick, but I understand it. But Dizon in the mid-2nd? I'd be shocked if he was drafted before the 4th and if so, good riddence. He's 225 pounds and you're going to draft him in the 2nd round to play middle linebacker? I know that he's got good dropback-coverage skills, and that's nice, but he's likely going to get run over if he can't gain 15 pounds. Just seemed unecessarily risky at that point. They could have drafted Rice and still taken Dizon at 66 (why in the world did they trade up for Kevin Smith anyway? Were the Rams going to take him?)

It wasn't a bad Lions draft, but it was pretty average and had the typical head-scratching moves.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
04-28-2008, 12:00 PM
The only real pick I question with the Lions is Dizon. I'm not a huge fan of the Cherilus pick, but I understand it. But Dizon in the mid-2nd? I'd be shocked if he was drafted before the 4th and if so, good riddence. He's 225 pounds and you're going to draft him in the 2nd round to play middle linebacker? I know that he's got good dropback-coverage skills, and that's nice, but he's likely going to get run over if he can't gain 15 pounds. Just seemed unecessarily risky at that point. They could have drafted Rice and still taken Dizon at 66 (why in the world did they trade up for Kevin Smith anyway? Were the Rams going to take him?)

It wasn't a bad Lions draft, but it was pretty average and had the typical head-scratching moves.

I agree that Dizon was a head scratcher but based on Round 1 and Round 3 this is draft is solid. Round 5/7 was ok, but I don't expect much from those rounds anyway. Dizon came for a visit and had a tape session with our LB Coach/Joe Barry, breaking down plays. I guess they were impressed enough with him to take him along with his produciton. Dizon had the most experience of calling plays as a MIKE in a Tampa 2 defense(3 years at Colorado). He had production and can bulk up(losing weight is more of a problem in Detroit). Wans't Urlacher a safety at New Mexico. Not comparing the two but what was Urlachers draft weight?Right now its a head scracher but I'll wait and see.

Trading up 2 only spots for Kevin Smith assured us getting Kevin Smith. The draft was an F if we didn't get a good RB and the Rams could use a backup RB and Smith told the Rams he could see himself in Detroit(per an article I read). We couldn't have afforded not to get him and we gave up a 6th but had 2 5ths so in the trade up so we didn't give up anything really. Kevin Smith is a better fit in the zone blocking scheme than Rice and is a bigger back. We needed a bigger back that can be a workhorse. Rice is more of a Tatum Bell. Bell is our home run hitter, well for this year anyway. I had them rated Forte,Smith,Chris Johnson,Rice based on what the Lions needed.

I would have preferred Quentin Groves in Round 2 and then taken Dizon in Round 3/Round 4 but instead we got Avril in a trade up. Avril dropping saved the Dizon pick a little bit.

sweetness34
04-28-2008, 12:38 PM
Urlacher was around 240-250lbs when he was drafted I think lol....He was much bigger than Dizon and far more athletic.

I like Dizon as a player....but not in the 2nd Round.

PACKmanN
04-28-2008, 02:11 PM
I'm not sure the Vikings can even be put in the discussion, since it's hard to compare Allen to a bunch of rookies (and all of the money they spent).

The Lions are out of the equation. They made a few solid moves but I'd be hard pressed to grade them higher than a C+

The Packers? Eh. I liked the Lee pick. Brohm was great value, but what will that be worth? It's a good pick because you don't know what you'll get from Rodgers.

I guess what I'm saying is that it's almost impossible to vote for the Packers over the Bears, because the Bears rookies are going to contribute a lot more. Some of that is because the Packers are a better team than the Bears. Some is because the Bears had higher picks. Others is because the Packers made a couple of picks that were with depth and special teams in mind. Kinda hard to get a top grade from that, but it's solid nonetheless.

When you grade the picks you grade for 2 reasons, value and will they contribute to that team. The Packers got the value, but with the depth they have on some positions it will be hard for the rookies to do much. The Bears got both value and players who can come in and have a chance to contribute for the team. This making the Bears the winners of this year draft for the North.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
04-28-2008, 02:21 PM
Urlacher was around 240-250lbs when he was drafted I think lol....He was much bigger than Dizon and far more athletic.

I like Dizon as a player....but not in the 2nd Round.

Yeah it looks like Uralacher was at least 255lbs. I wasn't comparing the two by any means. I just thought since Urlacher was a safety he was lighter and then bulked up in his first couple of years.

Tatupu on the other hand was 238 lbs at the combine so thats comparable.

Dizon can bulk up. I don't think that will be a problem. He has great instincts, is a very good tackler, has intangibles, fits the Cover 2 and can call a defense. That is why we got him. Hopefully, what he lacks in athleticism is made up for with his instincts. This pick is a head scratcher but you gotta wait and see with all draft picks. Out of all our picks, I hope he works out along with Caleb Campbell.

sweetness34
04-28-2008, 02:55 PM
And that's fine, but you could have had him in the 3rd or 4th Round. Value wise it's not very good. Could have had another player there.

It's kind of like Bazuin for us last season. I like the player, but not where he was picked. Value wise it was a reach, as was Wolfe.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
04-28-2008, 03:08 PM
And that's fine, but you could have had him in the 3rd or 4th Round. Value wise it's not very good. Could have had another player there.

It's kind of like Bazuin for us last season. I like the player, but not where he was picked. Value wise it was a reach, as was Wolfe.

I agree. Value wise it wasn't very good with Dizon in Round 2. However, If the draft went Cherilus,Kevin Smith in Round 2,Dizon in Round 3,Fluellen,Avril(who dropped), people probably wouldn't think it was too terrible with the way running backs were going off the board. We didn't even have a shot at Forte or Chris Johnson. But then the philsophy would have been offense/offense in Round 1 and 2 so, we'd still get bashed for that.

You could go Albert,Groves,maybe Kevin Smith,Dizon,Fluellen. But that maybe Kevin Smith falling to pick 76 is the questionmark because with the trade down we move up 10 spots in Round 3. If we don't get Smith, the Lions draft isn't very good because he was the last workhorse RB IMO. Plus Cherilus has 50 more games of tackle experience than Albert. I'll go by production over potential.

Its all a wait and see thing. 3 years, the Packers might have the best draft and Brohm could be the reason. Who knows.

TitleTown088
04-28-2008, 03:14 PM
I'm not sure the Vikings can even be put in the discussion, since it's hard to compare Allen to a bunch of rookies (and all of the money they spent).



By that reasoning Grant Should be included with the Packers draft as a 6th rounder.

Crazy_Chris
04-28-2008, 04:04 PM
Mel Kipers Grades for the NFC North

Chicago Bears: GRADE: B
Chris Williams is the left tackle the Bears need from a pass-protection standpoint, and he'll start as a rookie. Matt Forte is a hard-nosed running back. He's not flashy, but he's elusive. I like what the Bears did on Day 2, starting with Vanderbilt WR Earl Bennett, who reminds me of Hines Ward. Arkansas DT Marcus Harrison lasted until the third round because of some off-field concerns, and Nebraska's Zack Bowman is a big corner who was once projected as a first-round pick, before he suffered injuries to both knees. LSU safety Craig Steltz -- who reminds me of former Bear Doug Plank -- will be a solid special teams player and could push for a starting job. With his height, Arkansas WR Marcus Monk could be a red zone threat and he qualifies as a very good seventh-round pick. He looked like a second-rounder after his junior year, and ran a 4.42 in the 40-yard dash, which is excellent for a 6-foot-4, 220-pound receiver. Tight end Kellen Davis has tremendous athletic ability but he needs to be more consistent.


Detroit Lions: GRADE: C+
Gosder Cherilus is a right tackle who is an effective run-blocker, which is why the Lions drafted him in the first round. But third-round pick Kevin Smith is the key player in the Lions' draft class. Smith proved at Central Florida he could carry the load, and in my opinion, he'll be the Lions' starting running back in Week 1. Jordon Dizon is undersized for a middle linebacker, but he has a chance to be productive in Detroit's scheme, because he has the ability to cover the deep middle. Fullback Jerome Felton is more effective as a runner than a blocker, but he's a good value pick in the fifth round. Army safety Caleb Campbell went in the seventh round and is big at 229 pounds. Campbell could be an OLB if he puts on 10 to 15 pounds. Cliff Avril could be a decent pass-rusher, although he had only six sacks in 2007. DT Andre Fluellen flashed big-time ability early in his career at Florida State but never lived up to it.


Green Bay Packers: GRADE: B-
The Packers took a QB on both days of the draft: Brian Brohm in the second round and Matt Flynn in the seventh. Brohm is cerebral and accurate, but can he stay healthy? Flynn is big, has good arm strength and can run for a first down if he has to. Flynn has intangibles, something you must have to lead a team to a national title. Second-round pick Jordy Nelson is a great athlete, and will be a faster version of former San Francisco 49ers wide receiver Dwight Clark. Patrick Lee is a very good cover corner and a solid second-round pick. Tight end Jermichael Finley has a ton of talent, he just has to make strides in terms of catching the ball and blocking. Defensive end Jeremy Thompson has a similar attitude and motor to current Packer Aaron Kampman.


Minnesota Vikings: GRADE: B
They had only one pick in the first four rounds. I had safety Tyrell Johnson going in the first round, so to get him in Round 2 (43rd overall) is a great pick because Johnson has big-time skills. In the fifth round the Vikings took John David Booty, an accurate quarterback who is great at throwing on the move and sees the field extremely well. Letroy Guion is more of a developmental defensive tackle, and center John Sullivan was average in 2007, but at times looked very good in his career. Factor in the addition of DE Jared Allen, and this was a good draft for the Vikings.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft08/columns/story?columnist=kiper_jr_mel&id=3357479

sweetness34
04-28-2008, 04:40 PM
Well yea, if you factor in getting a Pro Bowl DE by trading your first round draft pick then hell yes it's damn good draft.

Which is why I don't include Allen in their grade. I thought their draft was ok, but I'd actually take the Packers' draft over theirs.

I'd rank the drafts on paper (the players who were picked);

1) Bears
2) Packers
3) Vikings
4) Lions

And I'd actually consider putting Minnesota at #4. But maybe that's because I'm not that high on Johnson or Booty.

DisgruntledLionFan#54
04-28-2008, 06:01 PM
Hard to take Kiper's grades, or anything he says at all, seriously when he's said in things in the past like: Akili Smith will be the best QB of the '99 draft class or Mike Williams is the best overall player in the '05 draft. Better served looking at what someone like Gooselin or Mayock have to say than MK.

Tatupu had a similar build and draft position as Dizon when he was taken in '05. Maybe he would have been there at 66, maybe not. With the likes of Brown, Flacco, Avery and Jordy going as early as they did, there were, and never are, guarantees. With Lofton and Mayo off the board, they weren't going to take that chance and lose out on all 3.

And I'm much more comfortable with them drafting a guy who's actually played the position(Cherilus) than someone who never has(Albert) and only projects to as a pro. Didn't like Otah at all for the ZBS they are going to run.

Solid B considering the guys they really wanted(Harvey, Mayo, Lofton) went as early as they did.

And I don't think any of the four drafts stood out from the others. A few head scratchers, but overall, lots of solid football players brought into the NFCN.

umphrey
04-28-2008, 06:40 PM
Yahoo draft grades

A-
Packers. Brian Brohm gives the Packers insurance at quarterback if Aaron Rodgers falters. Jordy Nelson is a deep-threat receiver who also returns kicks. They got great value for a team picking near the bottom.

B-
Bears. No, they didn’t get a quarterback, but they got three players—Chris Williams, Matt Forte and Earl Bennett—who can help an anemic offense, plus a defensive tackle (Marcus Harrison) who has first-round skills.

D
Lions. Gosder Cherilus will improve the offensive line, but the need for secondary help was not addressed, and Dan Connor would have been a safer pick at linebacker than Jordon Dizon.

B+
Vikings. Trading their first-round pick for Jared Allen was the best part of their draft. But it also was shrewd to move up five spots for Tyrell Johnson, a safety most scouts love.


Interesting that even taking into consideration the Jared Allen deal, we edged out the Vikings by a hair.

This makes me feel like less of a homer for liking the Packers draft the best.

Scotty D
04-28-2008, 06:44 PM
Yahoo is dumb. Who did they want us to take for the seconday? We had much more pressing needs.

sweetness34
04-28-2008, 06:46 PM
Jordy Nelson is not a deep threat WR with 4.51 speed. He's a good WR, but not a deep threat.

I do like Patrick Lee though but I have to disagree with Green Bay having the best draft on paper. And Yahoo really isn't a source I'd use to grade drafts anyway.

But it doesn't really matter, we'll find out in 2-3 years.

DisgruntledLionFan#54
04-28-2008, 07:00 PM
Here's Gosselin's take:

Chicago - A - The Bears subscribe to the big-school drafting philosophy and found quality throughout the draft. WR Bennett in the third, S Steltz in the fourth, CB Bowman in the fifth and WR Monk in the seventh were all value picks.

Detroit - A - The Lions wanted to make this a defensive draft and selected three potential starters in the first three rounds. But their run(mine) offense, the NFL's worst last season, may benefit even more from the arrival of OT Cherilus and RB Smith.

Green Bay - B - The Packers traded out of the first round and then turned in the best second round of the draft. Brohm gives them insurance for Aaron Rodgers, Lee gives them another big corner, and Nelson is a big-body, big-play receiver.

Minnesota - C - The Vikings sent their first- and third-round picks to Kansas City in the deal for NFL sack leader Jared Allen, which slowed this draft down. But getting S Johnson at No. 43 was a bargain, and Booty provides insurance at quarterback.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/columnists/rgosselin/stories/042808dnspogosselingrades.3945201.html

TitleTown088
04-28-2008, 09:15 PM
Jordy Nelson is not a deep threat WR with 4.51 speed. He's a good WR, but not a deep threat.

I'm not commenting per say on yours here but I ust though I would bring this up...

Nor does he need to be, he's going to get most his big plays off YAC, which he is great at.

bearsfan_51
04-29-2008, 12:02 AM
By that reasoning Grant Should be included with the Packers draft as a 6th rounder.

You mean Samkon Gado version 2.0?

toonsterwu
04-29-2008, 12:03 AM
If you include Jared Allen, then the best draft was probably Minnesota's, as they got the player they needed, while also adding a potential impact safety in the 2nd and picking up an intriguing WR option in Jaymar Johnson.

That said, if you don't include Allen, then the best draft was either Chicago or Detroit. Detroit did what it had to. No studs perhaps, but they added some OL help, got a potential lead back. They got Dizon inside, and Campbell might be able to challenge at SAM, although Paris will move there. Fluellen and Avril add much needed DL depth. I like the Avril pick up. He may simply be a situational 4-3 pass rusher, but he could also develop into an open side end terror.

I'm usually pretty fair about these things, and I honestly do believe the Bears had the best draft. They directly addressed almost all their needs for the short term. Now, long term, there are questions, but the focus was short term and

a) We got a ready LT, which kicks Tait to RT, improving two spots on the OL.
b) We got a big back that can challenge Benson, and that may be the favorite already
c) We got arguably the most ready WR in the draft, and another WR that could be intriguing (although likelihood is PS or not on roster)
d) We needed a potential 0, and Harrison has the talent.
e) We needed a SS to challenge. Check in Steltz, who could start.
f) We needed a blocking TE. Check with Kellen Davis.

Now, I would've liked to see more OL earlier. I like Barton, but injuries worry, and Adams is developmental. That said, Beekman could challenge from last year, despite being groomed for center, and Metcalf/St. Clair could be stopgaps (although doubt they move St. Clair inside)

It's not inconceivable that this draft will provide the Bears with say, 5 starters this upcoming season. Of course, that's all assumption, and I'll be the first to say the "upside" in this draft is somewhat limited. But it addressed immediate needs.

TitleTown088
04-29-2008, 01:42 AM
You mean Samkon Gado version 2.0?

Come one now, even you can't believe that one is true.

When was the last time ol' Samkon rushed for 2 bills in a playoff game?

johbur
04-29-2008, 03:19 AM
I am leaving Jared Allen out of the draft discussion. If you want to talk about off-season, fine. But he wasn't even a draft day trade. Ryan Grant for a 6th rounder pwns Jared Allen for a 1st rounder, 2 3rds and a bottle of Bacardi.

Also, everyone but the Packers picking in the middle of the rounds.

Anyways, The picks themselves should be looked at, not so much the needs of the team, or look at the needs and then look at the player.

Alphabetically:

Chicago Bears (7-9): Even though the Bears still suck, they did a nice job. They're moving Tait to RT, so Chris Williams is a day 1 starter at LT. This gives me major wood thinking of Cullen Jenkins and KGB abusing him. Anyways, this guy is gonna be a 5-10 year starter and they make Tait better by having him play RT. I don't like the Matt Forte pick. I didn't like it for GB (and we passed on him) and I don't like it for the Bears, except in a rival Hah-Hah you took Forte and Benson is a bust type of liking. AP and Wolfe are role players, but which one gets cut now with Forte on board? I like Thomas Jones more than Forte or anyone on the roster now, but that ship has sailed. Evidently the Bears only scouted Vanderbilt. Earl Bennett does not impress me but he definitely is a need considering the stiffs on the roster right now. I was not pleased to see Steltz become a Bear. He's good and it seems there's always an injury for one of the safeties. I wanted Bowman to be a Packer and I had him in my Packers mock as a fifth rounder. He's a boom/bust guy with great talent but a terrible injury. I don't know if he'll give them anything this year, but he has starting potential. Kellen Davis is a nice pick, though he'll be the third TE. He is not a good blocker and Olsen and Clark are better receivers and I thought Gilmore was a nice player, so not a great fit IMO. But I fully understand BPA after four years of Ted. They had five 7th round picks, and the first three do nothing for me. I doubt they make the team. I think Kirk Barton and Marcus Monk are very nice players at good value, though. An interesting draft with some high risk/high reward players and 12 selections. Considering the BEars were picking mid-round they had some decent value for a number of guys, I think they reached on some others.
Grade: A-

Detroit Lions (7-9): A nice draft. They took Cherilus high, as he was a late 1st rounder, but maybe they couldn't trade down at will like Ted Thompson can. Who wants to talk to Matt Millen? No one takes him seriously after he has sucked for so long and not been fired because he huffs Ford choad. Anyone else watch the senior bowl with Cherilus kicking around Chris Long and Glenn Dorsey? I haven't followed Dizon, but now they have two good LBs. I laugh every time I see our scrub Lenon still on the Lions. Happiness is your division rivals signing players not good enough to be on your team. I love Kevin Smith, almost as much as I love the lineman that opened those huge holes he ran through... ;D Smith and Felton address the run game and ditching Martz makes it likely they'll even be used for more than 5 plays a game. Three guys on the D-line (Avril being a 3-4 LB not-withstanding) to try to replace Rodgers and keep the defense from getting savaged up the gut a solid move. Looks like some needs met, some guys reached for, some guys good value for and they avoided drafted Devin Harris in round one. The QB situation still does not impress me, but maybe Stanton will press for a starting job this year.
Grade: B.

Green Bay Packers (13-3): Division winner with 20 out of 22 players coming back. Heck, if we drafted solely for the purpose of beating the Bears that would take the Packers to 15-1... ;D Maybe not, but there are still 20 starters coming back, plus the 6 guys who were on IR. What blows is that Favre is gone. When I look at Dallas, Frisco and Miami and what happened after their HoF QB left, it is just not pretty, except when Joe Montana left and was replaced by Young. I am hoping that is what happens with GB. The defense is strong, the special teams are a point of emphasis and the GM has secured a number of non-QB playmakers. Anyways...
GB traded out of the first round and took Jordy Nelson. Most players have nice highlight reels, but young Jordy has one with two TD passes thrown, 2 PR returns for TDs and a slew of big catches and TDs. He pwned Aqib Talib. The problem? He'll have to impress beyond initial belief to be the 3rd WR on the roster and could very well be the 5th on the depth chart. I'm glad he has PR skills. Just like Rodgers falling to GB a couple years ago, a starting quality QB fell to the Packers in R2 with Brohm. Look at the stats. The winning, the big numbers, the solid competition he put those numbers up against. He'll be the #2 QB just like Brunell was the #2 QB behind Favre all those years ago. If Rodgers gets hurt, Brohm still gives the Packers a chance to win instead of having a season Ortoned, Jacksoned or Orlovskyed if there's an injury to the starter. 60 QBs started for the 32 teams last year. This is a solid need/value choice as Brohm has starting QB potential and the Packers had ONE active QB on the roster prior to the draft. Patrick Lee completes a very solid R2. He's an Al Harris clone with his physical nature, but he runs better than Al did in his youth. Jermichael Finley a nice talent at TE but he's raw. TT passed on every TE taken over the past 3 years but took Finley. Not Dustin Keller or any of the other higher rated guys. Finley will be the #2, or maybe #3 TE and the team is not too worried due to Donald Lee and going a legitimate 6 deep with the WRs. Jeremy Thompson likely to back Aaron Kampman up, which is good because he reminds me of Kampman a lot. A couple of linemen next, my favorite being Kevin Smith's main mauler. Josh Sitton has starting potential for this year and he can play all three positions on the line. think Breno is headed for the practice squad. Next is Matt Flynn. He's a national champion and played his best in the biggest game. He'll be the #3 QB, which is fine for a 7th rounder. Bill Swain in the end of the 7th is a practice squad guy unless there are a run of injuries in the wideouts. That's 9 picks and a trade that turns a 7th rounder into a 6th rounder next year. Mission accomplished on close to every area with the exception of the DBs. It might have been decided that the DBs shouldn't be going out by themselves.
Grade: A-

Minnesota Vikings (8-8): Not many picks. Tyrell Johnson a good player, maybe taken a touch high, but he wouldn't have been there the next pick. John David Booty did not impress me. He didn't impress Ted either, as Ted passed on him and took Flynn a couple rounds later. Look at how many players USC had drafted and JDB could not bring home the trophy with all that talent. I watch a lot of PAC-10 games and he just never did anything for me. That being said, he's better than what they got, which is just a total indictment on the Viking QB situation. Leroy Guion landed in the right situation as he can sit behind some very good DTs and perfect his craft. I don't think he'll make an impact whatsoever this year, but after a couple years of growth and coaching might be something. I thought his kid was going to be a UDFA considering he came out early after only one year of starting, but the cheating scandal drove him pro. Sullivan reminds me a little of PAckers center Scott Wells, but Scott did not have the bad senior season that Sullivan did. I thought Sullivan might have been an R7 guy, if drafted at all. Jaymar Johnson is so skinny he might blow away when hit by a strong Chicago wind. He's not amazingly fast and there were a stack of guys rated higher. Viking coaches liked him, so maybe they saw some things on his tape that made him take this kid in the 6th instead of trading down. I don't see anyone but Tyrell making an impact towards winning games this year. In five years, Johnson, Sullivan and Guion could make this a solid draft IF they progress, but otherwise this looks like a one player draft.
Grade: D, with Tyrell keeping this from being an F.


That makes it:
1) Bears (I'll give them the tie-breaker as they picked a starter with their R1 pick)
2) Packers
3) Lion
4) Vikings

Sportsfan486
04-29-2008, 03:31 AM
Jordy Nelson is not a deep threat WR with 4.51 speed. He's a good WR, but not a deep threat.

I do like Patrick Lee though but I have to disagree with Green Bay having the best draft on paper. And Yahoo really isn't a source I'd use to grade drafts anyway.

But it doesn't really matter, we'll find out in 2-3 years.

Watch more tape, read less 40 times. If he was on a track field in street clothes that 40 time might matter! Is he a Lee Evans type of deep threat? No. Can he run by people with deceptively good/great speed? In college he did!

It's obviously tough grading out drafts right now.. but.. I like the Packers' and Bears' the best. The Bears obviously will have more impact rookies but the Packers got really good prospects that fit their system and provide a lot of security and mid-to-long range benefit.

I went homer and voted Packers, because I love our draft, but the Bears definitely have upside in their draft as well. And if you include the Allen trade, the Vikings are the clear winner.

Gay Ork Wang
04-29-2008, 09:53 AM
Seriously? Giving the Packers an A- because they picked nice backup players?

Sure their team is great and they dont have alot of needs. But if the only draft Backup Players that makes it ******...Picking starting caliber players to backup, thats great drafting and a lucky position. Defending a pick with: But well the team is great so what ever we did, the team is still great so the draft is great.....

bearsfan_51
04-29-2008, 10:28 AM
Looking simply at the value of picks is a silly way to judge a draft. That's a Matt Millen draft. The most important question is if the draft helped your team. Obviously the Bears are going to beat the Packers in that regard no matter what the outcome because the Bears needed a lot more help and had much better picks. That's the way the draft goes if you aren't an idiot like Millen.

That said, I still think the Packers could have helped themselves a little more. It's really hard to justify the Jordy Nelson pick. Really hard. I actually think that Packers fans are lying to themselves when doing it. The whole "we aren't a team with holes" argument is a little weak as well. Your secondary is old and isn't really that good. You're telling me that Kenny Phillips wouldn't have helped your team more than Jordy Nelson? Hell, they could have taken Tracey Porter at 36 and then taken Patrick Lee and that would have made more sense too. That said, I think Nelson will start the year as the #3, as I've never been that impressed with James Jones. You've got to keep in mind that your receivers have always benefitted by having Favre throw to them. Name one receiver that left Green Bay and had the same production elsewhere. I can't. That security blanket is gone now, and I do think you'll realize that the rest of your offense isn't as good as you think it is (cough* Ryan Grant *cough*)

I really liked the Brian Brohm pick. If it hurts Rodgers' feelings then he should work at a nursery and not play professional football. I wish someone would have hurt Grossman's feelings two years ago instead of handing him a job with no production to back it up. Rodgers needs to be tested, you can't assume that he'll be the guy. No matter what the FO says.

Lee was a fine pick, and basically everything down the road filled in depth.

I'll give the Packers a solid B. But you really can't say much more than that because the impact from this class will likely be pretty minimal unless Brohm becomes your starting QB.

Brothgar
04-29-2008, 11:27 AM
The Lions seem to have the biggest divergence amongst people analyzing the draft people either love it or hate it there is very few neutrals (like me)

To address what I hear a lot about Cherilius being a reach I'm not so sure that Houston wouldn't have pulled the trigger on him had he fallen to them. I don't like Dizon as a MLB but he could be a serviceable SAM next year when we take a Laurenitis or Mugulio (SP? on both) next year solidifying a great LB corps for years to come. (NOTE: even if we don't pick that high I would seriously trade 2 first round picks to secure one of those guys they are that good.)

That said I think the Bears had the best draft in the NFC North. They didn't draft a QB but I'm not too sure that is a bad thing. Don't get me wrong I think Chad Henne is going to be a great pro QB. But I think next years QB class will be head and shoulders better than this one. They got a steal IMO in Marcus Monk. Also grabbed Forte right in front of the Lions noses.

(Hey Rod this is why you don't unveil your draft strategy all the players you wanted were all gone)


EDIT: According to fan polls on NFL.com

Fan Draft Grades:

Bears: C - My guess is they are mad about not getting a QB.
Lions: B - They are too happy to see Millen not draft a WR in day 1.
Pakers: B - Really? 2 QBs? I don't think they have much faith in Rogers.
Vikings: B - If you include Allen in the draft then it isn't all that bad. They filled their major need with a pro bowler. At first I thought it was too much but then seeing Jacksonville trade the same amount for Derrick Harvey it made me think twice.

TitleTown088
04-29-2008, 01:28 PM
I'll admit that the bears are starting to look like idiots for passing on a Qb every single year, but giving them a C and the rest a better grade is nucking futs. I have a hard time justifying them passing on Brohm in the second. I like the RB, but it's much easier to find a RB than a good QB.

BF I have a sneaking suspicion you'll be eating you're words on Grant just like you did with Jennings.

Crazy_Chris
04-29-2008, 01:29 PM
Minnesota Vikings (8-8): Not many picks. Tyrell Johnson a good player, maybe taken a touch high, but he wouldn't have been there the next pick. John David Booty did not impress me. He didn't impress Ted either, as Ted passed on him and took Flynn a couple rounds later. Look at how many players USC had drafted and JDB could not bring home the trophy with all that talent. I watch a lot of PAC-10 games and he just never did anything for me. That being said, he's better than what they got, which is just a total indictment on the Viking QB situation. Leroy Guion landed in the right situation as he can sit behind some very good DTs and perfect his craft. I don't think he'll make an impact whatsoever this year, but after a couple years of growth and coaching might be something. I thought his kid was going to be a UDFA considering he came out early after only one year of starting, but the cheating scandal drove him pro. Sullivan reminds me a little of PAckers center Scott Wells, but Scott did not have the bad senior season that Sullivan did. I thought Sullivan might have been an R7 guy, if drafted at all. Jaymar Johnson is so skinny he might blow away when hit by a strong Chicago wind. He's not amazingly fast and there were a stack of guys rated higher. Viking coaches liked him, so maybe they saw some things on his tape that made him take this kid in the 6th instead of trading down. I don't see anyone but Tyrell making an impact towards winning games this year. In five years, Johnson, Sullivan and Guion could make this a solid draft IF they progress, but otherwise this looks like a one player draft.
Grade: D, with Tyrell keeping this from being an F.

This was a good draft they got longterm security at SS by finding Sharpers replacement. Also got their eventual replacement for Birk in the 6th. Along with a solid backup QB prospect in the 5th. A C+ I would accept but a D is just Ridiculous.

umphrey
04-29-2008, 01:37 PM
Seriously? Giving the Packers an A- because they picked nice backup players?

Sure their team is great and they dont have alot of needs. But if the only draft Backup Players that makes it ******...Picking starting caliber players to backup, thats great drafting and a lucky position. Defending a pick with: But well the team is great so what ever we did, the team is still great so the draft is great.....

Even if we had a pick in the teens we probably wouldn't get a starter. 4 of our first 5 picks will see the field rotationally this year, that's pretty good.

Nelson: 3rd WR (we use up to 5)
Lee: Nickel or dime CB
Finley: 2nd TE (we rotated 2 last year)
Thompson: Rotational DE (backs up Kampman who played like 95% of snaps last year, we were looking for someone to rest him)

So that's a pretty good start, but in addition to that these are how they project in the future:
Nelson: starter, 2nd or 3rd
Lee: starter
Finley: probably starter
Thompson: maybe starter

So we get 2-4 starters and a starting quality QB as insurance. So we got a good number of starting quality players who develop as backups and great insurance for the most important position in football. I'd probably take Brohm over any other NFCN QB...he's a rookie so right now he's not better but he probably will be in a couple years.

bearsfan_51
04-29-2008, 01:37 PM
I'll admit that the bears are starting to look like idiots for passing on a Qb every single year, but giving them a C and the rest a better grade is nucking futs. I have a hard time justifying them passing on Brohm in the second. I like the RB, but it's much easier to find a RB than a good QB.

BF I have a sneaking suspicion you'll be eating you're words on Grant just like you did with Jennings.
I don't think he's really Samkon Gado bad, I was just making a funny.

I also don't think he's a top 10 back, which I've heard from a lot of Packers fans.

I also still don't think Greg Jennings is all that great. I've had tons of Packers fans say that Jennings is better than Berrian. I'd like to see if Jennings could ge the money Berrian got on the open market. I kinda doubt it. I never said Jennings was bad, he's just not as good as Packers fans think he is. I still think that.


And yes, we really need to draft a QB, but we really needed to replace Benson too. Benson is worse than Orton/Grossman, which is very depressing.

bearsfan_51
04-29-2008, 01:38 PM
I think the Packers will cut KGB, which will give Thompson a lot more time.

umphrey
04-29-2008, 01:41 PM
I think the Packers will cut KGB, which will give Thompson a lot more time.

He had a lot of sacks last year, I think he sticks for another year. We have a lot of use for a pass rush specialist and that isn't what Thompson is. He really reminds me of Kampman coming into the league.

TitleTown088
04-29-2008, 01:56 PM
I think the Packers will cut KGB, which will give Thompson a lot more time.

I could easily see that, but at the same time I could also see them moving Jenkins inside more often, to a degree taking over Williams role, and playing Thompson much more as an every down player. I think it all depends on Thompson's performance early on.


Also, I'm curious as to your Berrian being better than Jennings, I'm not disagreeing, rahter curious with your reasoning. Did Jennings not have more production last season as a second year player and three less games? I'll also say that you must take that with a grain of salt as well because Jennings had Favre and was surrounded by better WRs and a better offense too.

Mr. Marcus
05-01-2008, 05:20 PM
I've had tons of Packers fans say that Jennings is better than Berrian. I'd like to see if Jennings could ge the money Berrian got on the open market.
Is this a joke?

neko4
05-01-2008, 06:44 PM
I also still don't think Greg Jennings is all that great. I've had tons of Packers fans say that Jennings is better than Berrian. I'd like to see if Jennings could ge the money Berrian got on the open market. I kinda doubt it. I never said Jennings was bad, he's just not as good as Packers fans think he is. I still think that.



And now all of a sudden money decides player's talent? We've seen GM's over or under pay guys all the time. I dont think Kampman is paid what he's actually worth, does that make Kampman a bad DE?

regoob2
05-01-2008, 07:29 PM
And now all of a sudden money decides player's talent? We've seen GM's over or under pay guys all the time. I dont think Kampman is paid what he's actually worth, does that make Kampman a bad DE?
If he was on the market right now he'd get a ton thrown at him.

neko4
05-01-2008, 09:18 PM
If he was on the market right now he'd get a ton thrown at him.

The point is players arent always as good or bad as their salary indicates.

bearsfan_51
05-01-2008, 10:17 PM
Well if that's not the point then why did you bring it up? Kampman would get paid a truck load of money. Greg Jennings would not. Bad example.

GB12
05-01-2008, 10:26 PM
I
I also still don't think Greg Jennings is all that great. I've had tons of Packers fans say that Jennings is better than Berrian. I'd like to see if Jennings could ge the money Berrian got on the open market. I kinda doubt it. I never said Jennings was bad, he's just not as good as Packers fans think he is. I still think that.
Wow, for real? What makes you think that?

bearsfan_51
05-01-2008, 10:37 PM
Wow, for real? What makes you think that?

I just don't think he's that special of a player. He's benefitted from Favre, they've never asked him to be "the guy", and while he's a solid player with great production, I don't see that translating elsewhere.

Like I said earlier, name me one Packers receiver that did that well without Favre. I think that's the main reason Thompson drafted Nelson, he's clearly not content with the receiver position.

That or he's ******* nuts.

I also think touchdown receptions are a very overrated stat. I am really impressed with his high YPC though. I'm not sure he could maintain that without Favre though.

GB12
05-01-2008, 10:53 PM
I just don't think he's that special of a player. He's benefitted from Favre, they've never asked him to be "the guy", and while he's a solid player with great production, I don't see that translating elsewhere.

Like I said earlier, name me one Packers receiver that did elsewhere without Favre. I think that's the main reason Thompson drafted Nelson, he's clearly not content with the receiver position.

That or he's ******* nuts.

I also think touchdown receptions are a very overrated stat. I am really impressed with his high YPC though. I'm not sure he could maintain that without Favre though.
Well sure he's benefitted from having Favre. Favre has made a lot of WRs better than they are so I can see where you're coming from. I mean he made Bill Schroeder into a 1000 yard receiver a couple times. However I don't see Jennings as one of those. I'm not going to waste my time going any farther because I know you hold a strong opinion against it. Jennings is at least on the level of Berrian though. I just don't see any argument against that other than Jennings played with Favre.

As for the WRs doing something elsewhere, that's mighty hard to do if you've never been anywhere else. Driver was drafted by the Packers, Jennings and Jones too. We weren't Ruvell Martin's first team, but we were the first that he made the roster of which in this case is pretty much the same thing. The only one on our team that had been elsewhere is Koren Robinson. And Robinson had more success in Seattle than in Green Bay. I don't see your point in bringing that up.

bearsfan_51
05-01-2008, 10:58 PM
I'm talking about other receivers, not just guys on this current team.

Schroeder would be a good example, although I was thinking of Antonio Freeman. All-world with the Packers, all-crap everywhere else. There are others as well. Javon Walker is about the only one I can think of, and that was just one good year with the Broncos.

GB12
05-01-2008, 11:04 PM
I'm talking about other receivers, not just guys on this current team.

Schroeder would be a good example, although I was thinking of Antonio Freeman. All-world with the Packers, all-crap everywhere else. There are others as well. Javon Walker is about the only one I can think of, and that was just one good year with the Broncos.
Freeman only played one year outside of Green Bay. We let him go when he had lost it and at the end of his career. If I remember right I think he had an ok year in Philly too. I think he's someone that greatly benifitted from Favre, but he's not a great example for what you're looking for. What does he have to do with Jennings anyway?

johbur
05-02-2008, 02:08 AM
I'm not sure how many GB games you watch, but Brett to Jennings often was not a great pass on Brett's part. When Jennings torched Champ Bailey, that ball was underthrown and Jennings picked it away from Bailey, causing Champ to fall on his face. He also took a lot of Favre passes and gained major YAC. When you gain YAC, it is often not the QB that is making the play, it's the receiver making the play.

As far as the NFC North draft. If you drafted more than 7 players, you got a higher grade. That's because 50%+ or so of players don't make it in the NFL. When you draft 4 guys and get one guy who provides depth but probably won't be starting, how is that even an average draft? Maybe when you expectations are low that's an above average draft. I'll have Mike Sherman become your GM and you'll get years of getting one player per draft.
When you draft 9+ guys and half of them could contend for time, or are going to be serious contributors on Special Teams, that's a pretty good day. As far as the two QBs GB drafted, they had ONE QB on the roster. That leaves two back-up spots. They haven't signed a free agent. The math seems pretty easy to follow. Also the value of the pick. 7th round you get the national championship game MVP and a guy who wasn't starting solely because he had last year's #1 overall pick in front of him, a guy who could not win the championship game, btw.