Declined Perry's Option...thoughts on what will happen?

[Carl]

Or the Packers might have passed on a WR/RB prospect in the third...

And then ignore value and find a less talented player.

 

[adambr2]

Between upshaw and perry? According to who? The fans? Have you ever heard of Ted Thompson? It was anything BUT between those 2. The odds of him drafting someone you never heard of were just as good as him drafting Upshaw.

My point was if we were set on a pass rushing OLB in the first that year, Perry and Upshaw were the only two remaining at our pick.

It's hard to call Perry a "mistake" in retrospect when he did fit the mold of what many of us were looking for that year and the position that we needed. He had blazing 40 speed for a DE and had the athleticism to make many of us believe he'd have no problem making the transition.

Nearly everyone here was happy when Perry was the pick. (yes, I know there were some that rightly predicted he would struggle to make the transition). But for those just questioning the pick in hindsight, pretty easy to go back and say you don't like the pick now.

 

[adambr2]

And then ignore value and find a less talented player.

I see both sides of this. At some point, I think oversaturation at a position is a bad thing because you'll get to a point where you have to let good players go just because you can't keep that many players from that position. Montgomery will most likely cost us Abbrederis or Janis. Something to consider.

If they think he's top value and you're already as loaded at WR as we are, that's a point where I think trading down would be a better option to try to find value later. Of course, you need someone willing to trade up with you.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I see both sides of this. At some point, I think oversaturation at a position is a bad thing because you'll get to a point where you have to let good players go just because you can't keep that many players from that position. Montgomery will most likely cost us Abbrederis or Janis. Something to consider.

If they think he's top value and you're already as loaded at WR as we are, that's a point where I think trading down would be a better option to try to find value later. Of course, you need someone willing to trade up with you.

I don´t think the Packers consider Montgomery as a traditional wide receiver. They will find a way to get him on the field but I´m convinced the team will keep five other WRs on the 53.

 

[PikeBadger]

I think that's a likely scenario as well. Montgomery is going to be trained as a move around weapon imo. If he shows well in camp, Mc Carthy might try to put him in positions where either he or Cobb is going to be isolated with a LB. Another nasty weapon for opposing DC's to plan for. It could also mean that they will only carry 7 O-lineman on the roster this year with Tretter and Barclay backing up everyone but Bakhtiari.

 

[rodell330]

I don´t think the Packers consider Montgomery as a traditional wide receiver. They will find a way to get him on the field but I´m convinced the team will keep five other WRs on the 53.

Hmm? I don't think you see much Montgomery outside of the pre season unless he lights it up. Who's he going to beat out ?

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Sorry Rodell, what is your point ?

 

[tynimiller]

I don´t think the Packers consider Montgomery as a traditional wide receiver. They will find a way to get him on the field but I´m convinced the team will keep five other WRs on the 53.

I agree....he will basically eliminate the need for a dressing 3rd RB behind Starks in my opinion. Between him and Cobb and the old man Kuhn there is zero need....doesn't mean we won't carry a 3rd because we will be but not necessarily on game days.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Who? As a posted above: "I looked at a couple OLB taken by the Pats after the Montgomery pick and neither looks like they'll be the kind of pass rushers needed." It's easy to say they should have taken an OLB but since the Packers had the 9th pick in the '09 draft, their average pick in the last 6 drafts in the first round is 26-27. So again who should they have picked? Certainly not a player just so they could say they picked one, right?

Geneo Grisson whom the Pats drafted three picks later. Injuries hurt his season but he had four sacks, five hits, and 11 hurries on 164 rushes and also dropped into coverage 153 times prior to his injury.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I heard an interesting point about Montgomery, basically it was said that he's not really a "Packers" receiver. He's the kind of guy you manufacture touches for, he's really good with the ball in his hands but he's not a reliable route runner or receiver. The Packers offensive system doesn't manufacture touches for guys, Rodgers just throws to whoever is open. More and more I'm either convinced he's being moved to RB or Thompson used as third round pick on a returner.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

And then ignore value and find a less talented player.

Or they could have drafted Geneo Grisson, for example, at OLB...or Grady Jarrett at DT...LOTS of other players that were options. Unless you think that Montgomery was the last guy at his tier of talent and then everyone else available in the draft was worse.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think that's a likely scenario as well. Montgomery is going to be trained as a move around weapon imo. If he shows well in camp, Mc Carthy might try to put him in positions where either he or Cobb is going to be isolated with a LB. Another nasty weapon for opposing DC's to plan for. It could also mean that they will only carry 7 O-lineman on the roster this year with Tretter and Barclay backing up everyone but Bakhtiari.

I expect the Packers to keep eight offensive lineman, UDFA Matt Rotheram is an intriguing prospect.

I heard an interesting point about Montgomery, basically it was said that he's not really a "Packers" receiver. He's the kind of guy you manufacture touches for, he's really good with the ball in his hands but he's not a reliable route runner or receiver. The Packers offensive system doesn't manufacture touches for guys, Rodgers just throws to whoever is open. More and more I'm either convinced he's being moved to RB or Thompson used as third round pick on a returner.

I really don´t hope the Packers only want to use him as a kick returner. The coaches have to figure out a way to get the ball into Montgomery´s hands on offense as he´s extremely dangerous once he touches the ball. Otherwise spending a third round pick on him was a complete reach.

 

[Carl]

Or they could have drafted Geneo Grisson, for example, at OLB...or Grady Jarrett at DT...LOTS of other players that were options. Unless you think that Montgomery was the last guy at his tier of talent and then everyone else available in the draft was worse.

Clearly if TT picked him, he found his value the highest. Considering it was a need position at all, Montgomery must have been easily the best guy at the time.

I'd bet he tried to trade down, but didn't get any good offers.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I really don´t hope the Packers only want to use him as a kick returner. The coaches have to figure out a way to get the ball into Montgomery´s hands on offense as he´s extremely dangerous once he touches the ball. Otherwise spending a third round pick on him was a complete reach.

That was the point of the gentlemen I was listening to, the Packers don't run an offensive system that's predicated on manufacturing touches for one special player. The Packer's special players is Rodgers. Do you really want to remove Rodgers' ability to touch the ball or limit his improvisation by calling plays designed around getting one guy the ball? I get the allure of it but the Packer's offense doesn't appear to need a guy like Cordarrelle Patterson.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Clearly if TT picked him, he found his value the highest. Considering it was a need position at all, Montgomery must have been easily the best guy at the time.

I'd bet he tried to trade down, but didn't get any good offers.

Oh I don't question that Thompson thought he had the highest value, I can't think of a single reason (other than heavy drinking) that Thompson would chose a very raw receiver over other guys at positions of weakness.

 

[TJV]

...I can't think of a single reason (other than heavy drinking) that Thompson would chose a very raw receiver over other guys at positions of weakness.

Because, as one poster put it:

Oh I don't question that Thompson thought he had the highest value...

If Montgomery turns out to be a special player with the ball in his hands you'll see the reason. No guarantee of that of course, but that's true of all draftees.

 

[PackMan13x]

My point was if we were set on a pass rushing OLB in the first that year, Perry and Upshaw were the only two remaining at our pick.

It's hard to call Perry a "mistake" in retrospect when he did fit the mold of what many of us were looking for that year and the position that we needed. He had blazing 40 speed for a DE and had the athleticism to make many of us believe he'd have no problem making the transition.

Nearly everyone here was happy when Perry was the pick. (yes, I know there were some that rightly predicted he would struggle to make the transition). But for those just questioning the pick in hindsight, pretty easy to go back and say you don't like the pick now.

I completely understand and agree with you. All I am trying to say is with Ted, you never know. I understand we needed AND drafted an OLB that year. But I'm going to say it just happened to work out that way with Perry likely being the top guy on our board at the time, or very close to it. Who knows? All I'm saying is if Ted didn't draft Perry, it is no certainty that Upshaw would've been the pick.

 

[Carl]

Oh I don't question that Thompson thought he had the highest value, I can't think of a single reason (other than heavy drinking) that Thompson would chose a very raw receiver over other guys at positions of weakness.

Then I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. They could have picked other needs, but as you just pointed it wouldn't have been good value.

 

[TJV]

From packer.com report on today's rookie-camp practice. After noting that Rollins intercepted a pass from Hundley intended for Montgomery:

We did a lot of movement drills, mostly for guys we don’t have a lot of information on,” McCarthy said. Montgomery was one of the stars of the movement drills. “He has a ton of explosion. I thought he definitely stood out today,” McCarthy said.

Something else to be excited about?

http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...ach-says/83b153a1-28c2-430e-8bab-05ec0aefde52

 

[rodell330]

Sorry Rodell, what is your point ?

I was responding to someone in regards to Montgomery...we all know MM likes to carry 4 tightends so who's Montgomery going to beat out? If there's just Starks and Lacy then maybe he's active. Which is possible seeing how there's just Kuhn left behind those 2.

 

[ExpatPacker]

From packer.com report on today's rookie-camp practice. After noting that Rollins intercepted a pass from Hundley intended for Montgomery: Something else to be excited about?

http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...ach-says/83b153a1-28c2-430e-8bab-05ec0aefde52

That and Quinten Rollins' nifty interception. Not excited about Randall sitting it out with a tweaked ankle. I *hope* that's all it is and that he will in fact be practicing next week.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Then I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. They could have picked other needs, but as you just pointed it wouldn't have been good value.

I'm questioning whether the player was actually worth the value we assume Thompson assigned him. Isn't that the point of this entire discussion? If everyone just assumed Thompson took the highest rated guy and that that guy would automatically work out, then what the heck is there to talk about?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Because, as one poster put it: If Montgomery turns out to be a special player with the ball in his hands you'll see the reason. No guarantee of that of course, but that's true of all draftees.

Just because I think Thompson liked the guy didn't mean I automatically think he was the best pick. There are other evaluation criteria beside "did Thompson pick him". However, I'm perfectly willing to admit that the "Thompson selection" criteria is probably the most valuable metric us fans will get.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Oh I don't question that Thompson thought he had the highest value, I can't think of a single reason (other than heavy drinking) that Thompson would chose a very raw receiver over other guys at positions of weakness.

There's an assumption running through these last few posts that WR was not a position of weakness, or least of need.

This offense needs to be 4 deep at WR, simply by the nature of the thing and secondarily because of the lack of play makers at TE.

There seems to be an underlying assumption among the faithful that in the absence of Montgomery, either Janis or Abbrederis would step up into the #4 role. That's an assumption with little to support it.

As noted previously, the logical #4 would be a slot guy whereby he'd back up Cobb. If either Nelson or Adams were injured, Cobb could move outside with Montgomery taking the slot. Neither Janis nor Abbrederis fit a slot profile. Besides, Janis needs to make a jump and Abbrederis is coming off an ACL.

 

[HardRightEdge]

From packer.com report on today's rookie-camp practice. After noting that Rollins intercepted a pass from Hundley intended for Montgomery: Something else to be excited about?

http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...ach-says/83b153a1-28c2-430e-8bab-05ec0aefde52

I don't think there was any question about Montgomery being explosive while also being build like a brick sh*thouse. The popular question coming in is, "how many balls will he drop"? My particular point of interest is whether he shows difficulty tracking and holding on to the deep ball.