Best draft in the NFC North?

[umphrey]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

they know a lot of the guys they drafted won't be on the team in 3 years and they have to depend on some of the mid/late picks to blosson to remember anything about this draft besides Cutler.

how do u figure?

You guys drafted 9 guys and none on the first day. Without knowing much about your depth the numbers still stay that you are going to lose some. Probably as many as half in 3 years. For example, you took 3 receivers. At least one isn't going to stick.

You drafted quantity not quality. Drafting multiple players for a single position which you did at DE and WR would make me think that Angelo doesn't have a great deal of confidence in any one player but he thinks he can improve his chances with more shots.

Now that I read what I wrote a few times it's actually somewhat redundant/meaningless because you could make that statement about any team (no one expects to hit on every pick and even successful prospects leave the team for any number of reasons). It is just especially true for your team because with no picks on the first day you are even farther away from any guarantees.

[Gay Ork Wang]

we argueably had the best 2nd day out of anyone. did u even follow the late round pick success jerry angelo had?

Jerry picked BPA at the positions at need, he didnt pick more DEs just because he doesnt have confidence but because those were the best players on board.

just because we didnt have a day one pick that automatically makes us have a bad draft? that logic is horrible. why would anyone draft in the latter rounds then

[umphrey]

"late round pick success"

That doesn't make a draft. You guys got some players that have the possibility to be starters someday, some depth and some special teamers. You really can't be arguing that all or even most of those guys are going to turn into NFL caliber players.

For the Packers I like both our tackles, but I know realistically only one will probably stick. And even though I love our 6th and 7th round picks, I wouldn't even bet on them to make the roster. I think they can start on the practice squad and make a name for themselves as ST aces on the roster, and maybe we got lucky and found a guy who can really play. But really you have to temper your expectations when a player lasts until a certain round.

[regoob2]

Originally Posted by umphrey

"late round pick success"

That doesn't make a draft. You guys got some players that have the possibility to be starters someday, some depth and some special teamers. You really can't be arguing that all or even most of those guys are going to turn into NFL caliber players.

For the Packers I like both our tackles, but I know realistically only one will probably stick. And even though I love our 6th and 7th round picks, I wouldn't even bet on them to make the roster. I think they can start on the practice squad and make a name for themselves as ST aces on the roster, and maybe we got lucky and found a guy who can really play. But really you have to temper your expectations when a player lasts until a certain round.

With that thinking then you guys only got 2 starters and then just depth. Iglesias and Moore possibly even Marcus Freeman were better prospects than Lang and Meredith.

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by regoob2

With that thinking then you guys only got 2 starters and then just depth. Iglesias and Moore possibly even Marcus Freeman were better prospects than Lang and Meredith.

so was Gillbert

[regoob2]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

so was Gillbert

Goes without saying. :p

[umphrey]

Originally Posted by regoob2

With that thinking then you guys only got 2 starters and then just depth. Iglesias and Moore possibly even Marcus Freeman were better prospects than Lang and Meredith.

I don't disagree. Except for Quinn Johnson for a number of reasons so 3 starters. He was the #1 rated fullback, he's probably better than Hall/Kuhn, teams let fullbacks fall on draft day, easy position to adapt to, I could go on.

The rest of the guys I'm hoping for 1-2 depth players and 1-2 starters that will take time to develop. I expect some of them to flake out. Raji/Matthews are the only rock solid prospects. I wouldn't say that about any first rounder though.

Edit: Look at the 3rd rounders for the last 3 years of Bears drafting:
Earl Bennett
Marcus Harrison
Garrett Wolfe
Michael Okwo
Dusty Dvoracek

Now do you believe me? Some of you are simply being too optimistic.

[regoob2]

Originally Posted by umphrey

I don't disagree. Except for Quinn Johnson for a number of reasons so 3 starters. He was the #1 rated fullback, he's probably better than Hall/Kuhn, teams let fullbacks fall on draft day, easy position to adapt to, I could go on.

The rest of the guys I'm hoping for 1-2 depth players and 1-2 starters that will take time to develop. I expect some of them to flake out. Raji/Matthews are the only rock solid prospects. I wouldn't say that about any first rounder though.

Edit: Look at the 3rd rounders for the last 3 years of Bears drafting:
Earl Bennett
Marcus Harrison
Garrett Wolfe
Michael Okwo
Dusty Dvoracek

Now do you believe me? Some of you are simply being too optimistic.

Dvoracek was our starting NT before the injuries. Harrison is now our starting NT. Bennett is going to start at WR. They said they wanted to get Wolfe more involved at RB and hes a great STs guy. Whats wrong with 3 starters? The Packers now have 3 first round pick LBs. The other 2 havent exactly been great. Good yes. Not great. Especially seeing how you dont really need to draft LBs that early. Matthews is a nice prospect. Dont think hes going to be some monster Ware type LB though.

[russie]

detroit took a te when it clearly had needs on the offensive and defensive line and a qb that has a decent shot at being a bust, green bay took a workout warrior that had few starts in college and traded a lot of picks to move up, chicago took a slow receiver and a defensive tackle whose real claim to fame is that he can jump out of a pool, minnesota took a pothead that will be suspended at least once in his career and slow tackle that can really only run block.

none of the teams had stellar drafts(fool yourself with your homerism if you want). can some of these players step up and have great careers? definitely. do not be suprised if only two or three of the 32 picks made by the nfc north are names anyone can remember in 15 years



by the way, best draft goes to detroit. they got the best player at 3 different positions, none of them were reaches, and all of them were needed positions, regardless of whether they had bigger needs or not.

[SRogers92]

If Matthew Stafford turns out to be a Pro Bowler(have to think he does), then the Lions win this draft over and over and over ...

[Wallzy]

And if Matthew Stafford proves his accuracy and consistency problems in college weren't a fluke, and he struggles...then the Lions will be on the clock at #1 in 2011!

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by umphrey

I don't disagree. Except for Quinn Johnson for a number of reasons so 3 starters. He was the #1 rated fullback, he's probably better than Hall/Kuhn, teams let fullbacks fall on draft day, easy position to adapt to, I could go on.

The rest of the guys I'm hoping for 1-2 depth players and 1-2 starters that will take time to develop. I expect some of them to flake out. Raji/Matthews are the only rock solid prospects. I wouldn't say that about any first rounder though.

Edit: Look at the 3rd rounders for the last 3 years of Bears drafting:
Earl Bennett
Marcus Harrison
Garrett Wolfe
Michael Okwo
Dusty Dvoracek

Now do you believe me? Some of you are simply being too optimistic.

last DT packers got was Harrell.

Raji = bust?

[PACKmanN]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

last DT packers got was Harrell.

Raji = bust?

the last prospect the Bears draft was Williams

Bears 2009 draft = bust?

[TitleTown088]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

last DT packers got was Harrell.

Raji = bust?

last 20+ QBs Chicago got = See sig :)

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by PACKmanN

the last prospect the Bears draft was Williams

Bears 2009 draft = bust?

well obviously u didnt understand what i was trying to say...

[PACKmanN]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

well obviously u didnt understand what i was trying to say...

well the only reason Harrell is considered a bust is because of injuries, so by that Williams = bust.

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by PACKmanN

well the only reason Harrell is considered a bust is because of injuries, so by that Williams = bust.

...

well u still didnt understand what i am trying to say
besides that harrell had 3 years

[SRogers92]

And if Matthew Stafford proves his accuracy and consistency problems in college weren't a fluke, and he struggles...then the Lions will be on the clock at #1 in 2011!


Stafford's accuracy wasn't a problem ... I believe he had, what? 62% completion ... stop looking at years 1 and 2 ... he was a true freshman/sophomore ... he improved every single year and took a large step this past season to improve, despite his OL being below average ... he wasn't any more consistent then most college QBs coming out as a true Junior ... his defense was atrocious and put him into some sticky situations where he had to force plays to get back into the game ...

[PACKmanN]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

...

well u still didnt understand what i am trying to say
besides that harrell had 3 years

I'm not trying to understand what you said; I'm giving a point on the "Harrell=bust" comment.

[Gay Ork Wang]

Originally Posted by PACKmanN

I'm not trying to understand what you said; I'm giving a point on the "Harrell=bust" comment.

well after 2 years of doing nothing its kinda not a good sign...

[PACKmanN]

Originally Posted by *** Ork Wang

well after 2 years of doing nothing its kinda not a good sign...

a bust is someone who has given the opportunity to do something and does nothing. Injuries haven't given Harrell that opportunity.

[regoob2]

Originally Posted by PACKmanN

a bust is someone who has given the opportunity to do something and does nothing. Injuries haven't given Harrell that opportunity.

So if he never plays a down in his NFL career because of injuries he's not a bust?

[BloodBrother]

I think every NFC North team did very well in their drafts. Lions hopefully got their QB of the future. And here only a few years ago it was the Pack with Favre and that was pretty much it in the NFC North. Now we have Rodgers, Cutler, and potentially Stafford. Vikes are still searching, however

onto the draft. I'd pick the Packers as having the best one, and that should come to no surprise. The reason I picked them though is I think about 4 of these players they picked can have an immediate impact this season, especially at key positions of need. Even the guys they got late should at least be helpers on Special teams, which was another bit of weakness for the Packers...mainly kickoff return coverage. I LOVE the value picks by the Bears, and considering they didn't have a Day 1 pick at all it makes their draft even more impressive. Got to see Gilbert quite a bit over here since I live near San Jose. Love that pick and I love the Moore pick

I like the Lions first 3 picks a lot although I think they would have been better off going with Oher with their 2nd 1st rounder rather than Pettigrew.

Vikings surprised me passing on an OL and taking Harvin. Clearly that nugget of info about how the Vikes crossed off 78 names due to character concerns was nothing more than a smokescreen. Harvin is a great athlete and a very dynamic player, but he comes with obvious risk. If he pans out, the Vikings have another great weapon to go along with AP for years to come. Getting the beast loadholt with their next pick took care of that OL they needed.

I don't think any of these teams should get anything lower than a B-...and I don't think any of them have by most experts.

final grades:

Packers: A-
Bears: B
Lions: B
Vikings: B-

Originally Posted by regoob2

Packers fans dont feel you gave up way to much for Clay Matthews?

My thoughts as I heard the details was an obvious yes...and according to the draft value chart they did give up too much. Seeing them nab Lang/Quinn Johnson/Meredith in day 2 with their 4th/5th round picks basically eased/erased my concerns over that trade. Would have been nice to keep the picks, obviously, but for years Thompson has been hoarding picks and adding more picks as the draft goes along. Every year it seemed they would finish with 10-12 picks, and would have to end up cutting 2-3 of those guys by the time roster cuts comes around. Couldn't keep stockpiling all those picks. I'm just glad they didn't end up giving up a 1st or 2nd rounder next year, which is what Belicheck did to other teams during the draft.

[Addict]

I see your homer claim and raise you a 'as a Lions fan I voted packers'

[VoteLynnSwan]

Originally Posted by TitleTown088

last 20+ QBs Chicago got = See sig :)

your sig is funny, the only problem is that the quarterbacks that we have had don't make it to the endzone.