Grade this draft

[RicFlairoftheNFL]

I gave it a C
I loved Spriggs and Martinez picks.
Clark I'm not sure about at all as I've not seen him play and do worry he's another year 1 and 2 Datone Jones.

I also thought we passed on a lot of better players in need positions. I know we weren't gonna trade up and get Conklin or Stanley in Round 1, but Ryan Kelly or Taylor Decker mid 1 would've been a nice trade up since that is what Ted ended up doing.

Kelly I believe can play all 3 interior positions, and we'll probably end up replacing one of our guards at the end of this year.

I think Decker is at the very least better than Bakhtiari, and maybe even better than Spriggs (Hard to tell with IU guys the program is really down). As much as I like the afore mentoned Spriggs, I think one of the 1st round talents we didn't get would've been a better fit.

Also I might have looked at Nick Marting over Spriggs. I think I think the braintrust sees the kid out of Northwestern as a possible next Julius Peppers. 6'7 290-295 type guy to play that hybrid DE/ILB spot.

Fackrell with the knee I worry about, but hey at least we didn't draft Jaylon Smith right?

Our sixth round pick plays faster than he's clocked. On the tape he looks like Willie Gault, on the clock he runs 4.4? Good pick here if he can catch the ball which it appears he can.

My main concern here is why the glut of Pac 10 guys? SEC and ACC were in the National Championship, so they've got talent, Big East does too as well as the smaller conferences. What's with the West Coast bias?

 

[rodell330]

He loves the Pac 12. Nick perry, clay Matthews, Dhaytone Jones, Randall, johnathan Franklin, Richard Rogers, Aaron Rodgers, Montgomery, etc...

 

[RRyder]

A sensible way to rate a new draft is to see if it picked players that can overcome team weaknesses. Before the draft the Packers desperately needed an upgrade at ILB, a DT, OT depth, a second string TE, a quick RB and a big WR who can run.
Martinez looks like an upgrade but may have trouble covering the pass. Grade B-
Clark is more of a NT than a DT and Lowry has shown little ability in college to get to the QB. GRADE C+
Solid picks at OT with two guys that have good potential. Grade A
No TE drafted. If Jared Cook gets hurt it's big trouble again.Grade F
No RB drafted but somebody might be available as an UFA so it's an incomplete at this point.
WR Davis is fast has good hands. GRade B+
Overall Grade of B-

I guess I have a different opinion of what a few of our needs were.

We needed a NT imo not so much as DT like you stated.

A quick RB, while it would've been nice, is hardly a need with the ability to rotate Cobb and Montgomery into the backfield. In any case I have a hard time listing a 3rd down scat back as a need.

And a backup TE? Really? You think RR is so bad he's not a quality backup? I'd list him as one of the better #2 TEs in the league. Below average starter sure. But still he's a really good backup. Not sure where your going with this one.

Really I thought we had 3 pressing needs going into this draft. NT to rotate with Guion, backup OT considering how thin we are there and ILB. Got good players for all those spots so I'll check those boxes off.

Not to say we couldn't use upgrades elsewhere but those were the needs. Every other spot is being drafted for strait rotation depth and development purposes. Really the only pick I didn't really like was the DE, who I'm drawing a blank on his name, at the end of the 4th and to a lesser extent our #3 pick.

Comming out of a draft happy with 5 out of the 7 players I throw in the win collumn. Solid B grade but as always time will tell. I was down on last year's draft at this time and now I'd grade that draft as an A.

 

[yooperpackfan]

This will be a biased poll...

Those that hate Ted can not take off the blinders to give a true assessment

Those that love Ted cant not take off the blinders to give a true assessment

Not true.
I despise Ted Thompson and I give this draft a solid B.
This draft was so solid and straight forward that it doesn't feel, to me, like Ted Thompson was involved all that much.

 

[ivo610]

this was one of many TT drafs that will garner a bunch of special teams player and guys that stick around here longer than they should because they were drafted here. I could only imagine what this team would be like without Aaron Rodgers.

On SIs mmqb podcast last week they said after talking to GMs around the league that the packers have the best roster in the league but were the worst coached offensive team in the league last season.
An interesting take

 

[easyk83]

I gave the draft a B+, TT addressed needs with players who look like they could turn into real players for us. I don't see any John Michaels' types with the group that was brought in. I also dont see any Nick Perrys because A) these guys will play the same positions they played in college and B) it seems like all of these guys have the intensity trait.

 

[Poppa San]

Not true.
I despise Ted Thompson and I give this draft a solid B.
This draft was so solid and straight forward that it doesn't feel, to me, like Ted Thompson was involved all that much.

Elliot Wolfe getting his feet wet?

 

[Vrill]

A sensible way to rate a new draft is to see if it picked players that can overcome team weaknesses. Before the draft the Packers desperately needed an upgrade at ILB, a DT, OT depth, a second string TE, a quick RB and a big WR who can run.
Martinez looks like an upgrade but may have trouble covering the pass. Grade B-
Clark is more of a NT than a DT and Lowry has shown little ability in college to get to the QB. GRADE C+
Solid picks at OT with two guys that have good potential. Grade A
No TE drafted. If Jared Cook gets hurt it's big trouble again.Grade F
No RB drafted but somebody might be available as an UFA so it's an incomplete at this point.
WR Davis is fast has good hands. GRade B+
Overall Grade of B-

I'm saying B- and I tend to agree with your assessments. I really like the Martinez pick. In fact, hes my favorite pick of the lot. Something is telling me that hes going to be a good one. Everything I'm reading and hearing is saying that he is extremely smart and hes a leader. Hes one of those guys that when he speaks, people listen. But in the end, it doesn't matter if he can't produce on the field. So we'll see. But I do have a good feeling. I really like the Fackrell pick and the two OL picks as well. I do wonder though if Murphy can play guard too. I have read on a few websites that hes capable of sliding inside. The Davis pick was the obligatory WR pick. TT loves drafting WR's. Davis is a speed demon with good hands it seems. He seems to be a elite returner. So we'll see with him. I like the Clark pick too. Glad we beefed up the DL.

So yeah, I'm saying B-

 

[Mondio]

i feel stupid trying to grade it now. I feel like I do most years I guess to a degree. It's not like I"ve studied any of these guys in any depth. Overall, I'd say we got some good guys to work with. Seem to be mostly high character, intelligent, hard workers with good physical attributes. What more can you ask for from a draft but good potential to work with?

I really like the 1st and 2nd. I think we have good players for the future at very important positions. 3rd i'm lukewarm, I like both 4th rounders. I wonder why that WR fell so far, he can run faster than most and it looked like he could make all the catches, so I'm excited to see what he can do too.

Overall I think it was solid, but we won't know for a while how good or bad it was.

and I don't think anyone was in charge of this draft other than Ted, like always. With all the smiles and fits bumping that went on with the head man after each pick, it was pretty obvious who was still running the show and most everyone in the room was very happy with the picks. At least thru the first couple rounds when I saw the reactions.

 

[easyk83]

True, it does depend who's rankings you go by. It just felt like a reach to me, as did McMillian and Thornton.

In fairness, so did Nick Collins. So I'm not going to say he's struck out every time, it just seems like TT has been in a bit of a draft slump since the Super Bowl. Last year's class looks pretty good so far, though. 2013 too.

The 11-12 drafts were brutally bad. Then you factor in that you have 3 straight years of misses in the first round from 11-13 and there you go. I think 14 was a solid but un spectacular draft, could get better if Adams returns to form and Janis keeps growing. 2015 looks like the kind of draft that you can build a super bowl run around.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

I gave the draft a solid "B". The draft was unspectacular, but necessary for building along the lines. The Packers needed a nose tackle and (hopefully) drafted one in the first round. The frustrating part about needing a defensive lineman is the fact that so many recent draft picks were spent on defensive linemen who didn't pan out. Spriggs is needed as a swing tackle for this year and possible replacement for next year. I have no idea what Fackrell will bring, but his age concerns me. I love the Blake Martinez pick. The Packers had no depth at inside linebacker. Lowry looks like an immediate rotation guy. I have no idea where WR Trevor Davis fits on the team, but you can't argue with speed. I'm hoping Kyle Murphy could play guard and possibly develop into a player.

The Packers are banking on internal development (guys like Jake Ryan, Mike Montgomery, Gunter, ect..) and veterans returning to form (Jordy Nelson and Eddie Lacy). Outside of Clark and Martinez, this draft might have little to no impact on the 2016 season.

 

[adambr2]

Prediction, Clark has a better career than Jack

Which is better, a solid but unspectacular player for 10 years, or a star impact player for 4 year? The older Rodgers gets, the more I would prefer the latter.

 

[easyk83]

Which is better, a solid but unspectacular player for 10 years, or a star impact player for 4 year? The older Rodgers gets, the more I would prefer the latter.

Perhaps but its alot easier for cats to be star impact players when theyre playing with a rock at NT.

 

[yooperpackfan]

Elliot Wolfe getting his feet wet?

I don't know, but it just didn't feel like a Ted Thompson draft to me.
This draft made much more sense than others.
Like not taking square pegs to pound into round holes and actually drafting for needs.

 

[Vrill]

MM had a heavy hand in this draft if anyone other than TT did I bet.

 

[AmishMafia]

B. I like the first 4 picks and not familiar enough with the rest. There were players I liked other players more at each pick, but it was close in those first 4.

I think our best pick is Spriggs. He has the tools and attitude to be a good one.

 

[ivo610]

Which is better, a solid but unspectacular player for 10 years, or a star impact player for 4 year? The older Rodgers gets, the more I would prefer the latter.

Careful, careers are never are obvious as they seem.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

I guess I'll give it a B as TT certainly is adding depth to the defense, very big deal and hopefully we've got some stud LBs now in case Barrington or Perry go down at all again this year. And can't complain that he's looking to beef up our OTs again and hopefully keep Rodgers more upright this season.

Little disappointed we didn't make a play for at least 1 more WR besides Davis or a TE, but I guess TT is figuring that Cook's going to be the guy there, I just hope Jordy and Montgomery are both back up to speed come this season, and Adams is out of his sophomore slump.

 

[Firethorn1001]

B. I'm not going to base it on 'they should have drafted X guy' because that is a personal bias and I don't do film on these guys. Going in, they needed to fill holes on the d-line, ilb and they needed bodies on the o-line for this year which they did. Given the needs, they weren't going to get a **** playmaker. Downgraded a little just because of the trade up. Would have liked they traded down somewhere to pick up another pick to offset that and have more darts at the dartboard, but that is a minor quibble. Otherwise, they did what they needed to do.

 

[sdh09e44]

Have no idea who any of these guys are so I give it an A. The only two names I had heard before were Clark and Spriggs. Saw a couple of mocks that had us taking Clark so that's why I heard of him and I heard that Spriggs was projected as a high 2nd round talent.

I like it this way because I have no preconceived notions about any of them. When you know a lot about the guys its easy to get caught up in the "my guy was better" mentality and be disappointed about the picks. I honestly don't care where the experts and that includes all the ones on this board and others, had these guys rated. To me no one is a reach because the only opinion that matters is Ted's.

This draft, more than any other I can recall, has made it clear that no one, and that includes the GMs, really knows anything. They make their best guess and take the guys they think are the right choices and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I have this feeling that even had the Packers not taken him Clark would have gone before Billings and that makes me very happy the Packers didn't take him (Billings) at #1. At the time I would have been very happy with that pick based on what so many of those experts were saying. Apparently 32 GMs knew something a lot of fans and experts didn't know.

Imagine taking Ragland or Jack instead of Clark, then grabbing Billings later on. Can't say I would've been mad about that.

But I'm excited about this Clark kid, I have a feeling he will surprise the people who are low on him. And you have to love his age, kid is so young and will still fill out his frame even more. Not many kids 20 years old get the chance to develop under NFL level coaching and conditioning. That's huge for him. And if he becomes a player worth keeping, in 4 years come contract time we'll have a ton of leverage cause he'll still be so young with maybe 2 contracts ahead of him.
I also imagine this guy is more of replacement to datone jones. Clark has some pass rush abilities so I hope he gets a chance at DE opposite Daniels while Guion and Pennel can hold down the middle.

Have to love Spriggs too. Not only is that big since 4 guys are on contract years, but he can become an elite LT in this league. Also not a bad guy for Murphy to come in with either, that dude is gigantic as well. I think TT hit with both these guys. Murphy value wise, Spriggs starter wise.


But in all, I said it going into this draft that the Packers were 1-2 elite guys away from being a top tier defense, and I'm not sure if we did that. It's gonna be tough seeing Jack or Ragland turn into a legit playmaker, Jack more so since he legitimately was the exact type of LB this team needed. But at the end of the day its on Rodg and the offense to come back into form. The success of this team is highly based on that, and I think that will happen in a big way with jordy and TBE addition of cook.

 

[Sky King]

On SIs mmqb podcast last week they said after talking to GMs around the league that the packers have the best roster in the league but were the worst coached offensive team in the league last season.
An interesting take

That may be a credible assessment. McCarthy and his reorganized offensive coaching staff had a terrible 2015 season. I'm hoping for a well-needed rebound in 2016.

 

[rodell330]

MM had a heavy hand in this draft if anyone other than TT did I bet.

Well that about sums it up haha

 

[rodell330]

On SIs mmqb podcast last week they said after talking to GMs around the league that the packers have the best roster in the league but were the worst coached offensive team in the league last season.
An interesting take

Well that makes me feel a lot better ..especially knowing virtually the same staff is back.

 

[HardRightEdge]

From strictly the 2016 perspective, I'd give this draft a D, but that's not really the point, which I'll get to in a minute or three. Other than swapping out Raji for Clark (the similarities are remarkable), for whom I believe a C grade is appropriate (where C is a non-curve average quality pick at #27), it is not reasonable to project any of these picks for even semi-regular duty barring starter injuries.

Martinez: Meet your new dime backer. The consensus is that his particular strength is zone coverage, which is exactly what you want in that spot. Maybe some nickel zone work. One would expect him to bring more field awareness than last season's efforts, which is a low bar to top.

Davis: Possible kick returner, possible stretch-the-field option in occasional 4 wide sets just to shake things up. Long strider with long speed. Unless he's a remarkable quick study in learning some routes and shows some wiggle off the line of scrimmage, he'll probably need to earn the kick return job to make the game day roster in 2016. He's slight...NFL press coverage will be an issue in putting the speed to work in 2016.

Spriggs: As I said before the draft, I can see him at TE in the short yardage 7-man front in 2016 as he adds some heft and polishes up some technique. I think it's been underappreciated how the poor short yardage running performance hurt this offence in extending drives. Thompson did not draft a blocking TE, we know the incumbents are not very good at it except maybe Cook, and from what I've seen, among the 20 or so UDFAs (whether actually signed or invited for tryouts) there's one TE, Grinnage (which almost rhymes with "scrimmage"), who actually fits the bill. Perhaps he'll be the surprise of this rookie class making this squad as the 3rd. TE and special teams player. Or maybe not.

The rest are not likely to see much playing action in 2016.

As for grading this draft for 2017 when the big FA class hits, I'd give it a B, maybe even a B+ but that's an optimistic developmental projection.

We've talked until we're blue in the face about how few O-Linemen and OLBs are under contract for 2017. This draft addressed that. There's considerable potential in Spriggs, Fackrell and Murphy at those positions but they are all projects to one degree or another. They all need to bulk up, which is a reasonable expectation given their frames, and they all need technique work. The ceilings are pretty good on these guys relative to their draft positions.

While Murphy is not the classic Packer OT-to-OG conversion (see Sitton and Lang, both around 6'4", 315 lbs. compared to Murphy's lanky 6'6", 305 lbs.), one would expect that's the thought process in picking this guy after Spriggs was already on board.

Lowry was dubbed "T-Rex" elsewhere in these pages for his extremely short arms on a very tall body. I wouldn't have thought it was genetically possible to be 6'5" with only 31" arms. Daniels has short arms, but not this short, and he's stumpy to start with. Perhaps the thinking is "what's 1 1/2 inches among friends?" relative to Daniels. Wolf's comment was hardly a debunking of the concern:

“He does have short arms for his frame, but we didn’t really see that as an issue,” Wolf said. “There’s a lot of guys with long arms who don’t extend them.”

What he did not illustrate is how those guys with long arms who don't extend them actually produce.

He's from my alma mater, so I'd like to see him make it, but it's not like I watch more than a couple of college football games per year, so I'm not going to get all excited one way or another.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Imagine taking Ragland....

I have, and as the years go by I suspect we will continue to do so. A ring would certainly blot out the memory.