PC Forums

General Category => NFL Talk => Free Agency => Topic started by: Antonio Andolini on January 26, 2013, 03:11:47 PM

Title: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Antonio Andolini on January 26, 2013, 03:11:47 PM
It has been shouted from the rooftops by Packer fans for years, "TT doesn't sign free agents". The biggest problem I have with this is that it is actually not true. TT signs free agents all the time, they just happen to be our own players. Why doesn't this count? Maybe because it isn't a change from what we had in the previous year. Change for the sake of change is not a recipe for success and there is something to be said for consistency and stability. Besides, the Packers under TT guidance haven't been cheap, we usually spend right up to the cap just like most everyone else.
 
TT has a proven track record of drafting really well, arguably better than any other GM in the league. Our coaching staff has done a great job of coaching those players and putting them in a position to succeed. When these players have played out their rookie contracts, TT has shown a commitment to signing them to well paying veteran contracts. This is an important part of developing the young talent, they have to know that they will be valued and rewarded for their hard work. If TT had a lower success rate of acquiring talented players through the draft, he would be forced to fix that problem by signing free agents out on the open market. This is actually what most other teams are doing, trying to fix draft mistakes and fill the holes those mistakes have created. There is greater risk in doing it that way, the biggest being, will those highly paid players be as successful in their new environment, in a new scheme, with new coaches and teammates?

TT has done a great job of balancing out the roster with talented young players and highly paid veterans that have a proven track record of production. When he arrived in Green Bay, he inherited an aging roster  that was up against the cap with very few young ascending players to point to. He kept important veterans like Clifton, Tauscher, Kampman, Harris, and Driver and also added FREE AGENTS Woodson and Pickett. He then started filling the roster with talented draft picks. When those young players had proven themselves he extended them. He has also gotten players to accept slightly less than they could get on the open market(Jennings, Nelson, Sitton, T. Williams) by extending them before they reach free agency, something you can only do with your own players. Yes no one is perfect and most would agree that Hawk is over paid for what he brings to the table.

Everybody would like to have their team add elite play makers in the off season but we are all under the same salary cap restrictions. Spending your allocated money wisely is extremely important for every team. TT and his staff have done a masterful job of this and have kept us out of "cap hell". His job in this area is going to get more difficult in the coming years as several more of our own very good players are going to be looking to get big raises.

A lot of  team's fans get extremely excited about their team signing a marquee/Pro Bowl player in the off season. It energizes what is otherwise a dull part of the football year, giving everyone months of thinking about how great this new expensive player is going to be. It doesn't always work out that way. There is a long list of high priced free agent busts. So far TT's success rate at signing our own players has been very good. We also haven't been forced to let any of our own young talented players leave in free agency because we couldn't fit them under the cap.

TT does sign free agents, its just that not many of them come from other team's rosters.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: JimATX on January 26, 2013, 04:39:29 PM
We like 'em shiny, new, and improved.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Pugger on January 27, 2013, 09:53:46 AM
TT doesn't sign many name FAs but he isn't opposed to signing UDFAs.  We've found a couple of gems this way (Sheilds and Barclay e.g.).
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on January 27, 2013, 11:20:55 AM
TT doesn't sign many name FAs but he isn't opposed to signing UDFAs.  We've found a couple of gems this way (Sheilds and Barclay e.g.).

TT has not signed any NAME free agents since 2006 (unless you count an obviously over-the-hill Saturday or past his prime Benson, both of who had NAMES but came on the cheap). TT also has not traded for a single NFL veteran player since 2007 (when he got Ryan Grant for a 7th round pick).

The record reveals TT has an aversion to adding NFL VETERAN talent to the team.

I certainly agree that he does, however, seem to relish signing undrafted/street free agents like Shields, T. Williams, D. Harris, D. Barclay and E. Walden.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on January 27, 2013, 12:05:48 PM
...
TT has a proven track record of drafting really well, arguably better than any other GM in the league. ...


yeah, i would definitely argue with that. ted has a less than stellar success rate in rounds 1-3 where expectations are high, and does a pretty decent job of finding players in rounds 4-7, where less is expected. but these are not blue-chip players. these are guys who make the roster and oftentimes end up starting because we have no other choice.



TT has not signed any NAME free agents since 2006 (unless you count an obviously over-the-hill Saturday or past his prime Benson, both of who had NAMES but came on the cheap). TT also has not traded for a single NFL veteran player since 2007 (when he got Ryan Grant for a 7th round pick).

The record reveals TT has an aversion to adding NFL VETERAN talent to the team.

I certainly agree that he does, however, seem to relish signing undrafted/street free agents like Shields, T. Williams, D. Harris, D. Barclay and E. Walden.


this is much closer to the truth. the only time thompson dabbles in free agency or a trade is when he is absolutely certain he is getting a blue-light special. it has to be a downright steal before he will take the deal.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Antonio Andolini on January 27, 2013, 01:50:52 PM
...
TT has a proven track record of drafting really well, arguably better than any other GM in the league. ...


yeah, i would definitely argue with that. ted has a less than stellar success rate in rounds 1-3 where expectations are high, and does a pretty decent job of finding players in rounds 4-7, where less is expected. but these are not blue-chip players. these are guys who make the roster and oftentimes end up starting because we have no other choice.

Really?

Aaron Rodgers
Nick Collins
AJ Hawk
Greg Jennings
James Jones
Jordy Nelson
Jermichael Finley
BJ Raji
Clay Matthews
Brian Bulaga
Mike Neal
Morgan Burnett
Derek Sherrod
Randal Cobb
Nick Perry
Jerel Worthy
Casey Hayward

Not exactly "less than stellar", the draft is an inexact science and nobody bats a 1.000. Yes he has missed on a few but that list looks like the core of our team to me. Considering that we are usually drafting toward the end of each round, TT has done a masterful job of  selecting players with talent, that fit our scheme, have a strong work ethic, and are good team mates. Not an easy thing to do. Josh Sitton, TJ Lang, and Desmond Bishop are also really good later rd picks. You can also include Sam Shields to this list since acquiring UDFAs falls under the draft evaluation process.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on January 27, 2013, 02:35:36 PM
...
TT has a proven track record of drafting really well, arguably better than any other GM in the league. ...


yeah, i would definitely argue with that. ted has a less than stellar success rate in rounds 1-3 where expectations are high, and does a pretty decent job of finding players in rounds 4-7, where less is expected. but these are not blue-chip players. these are guys who make the roster and oftentimes end up starting because we have no other choice.

Really?

Aaron Rodgers
Nick Collins
AJ Hawk
Greg Jennings
James Jones
Jordy Nelson
Jermichael Finley
BJ Raji
Clay Matthews
Brian Bulaga
Mike Neal
Morgan Burnett
Derek Sherrod
Randal Cobb
Nick Perry
Jerel Worthy
Casey Hayward

Not exactly "less than stellar", the draft is an inexact science and nobody bats a 1.000. Yes he has missed on a few but that list looks like the core of our team to me. Considering that we are usually drafting toward the end of each round, TT has done a masterful job of  selecting players with talent, that fit our scheme, have a strong work ethic, and are good team mates. Not an easy thing to do. Josh Sitton, TJ Lang, and Desmond Bishop are also really good later rd picks. You can also include Sam Shields to this list since acquiring UDFAs falls under the draft evaluation process.


i'll start with the obvious:


justin harrell
brian brohm
pat lee
terrence murphy
aaron rouse
abdul hodge
jason spitz
brandon jackson


now, let's look at your list of guys that you think have lived up to round 1-3 status:


Aaron Rodgers - best in the biz. no argument.
Nick Collins - blue chip for sure. tragic loss.
AJ Hawk - not even close to living up to a top ten draft pick. not a playmaker. a good low 2nd/high 3rd third round talent.
Greg Jennings - i'm very borderline on this, but i'll give it to you.
James Jones - great value for a third round pick.
Jordy Nelson - i like him. he's turned out better than many thought he would.
Jermichael Finley - vastly overrated and not even close to living up to the hype.
BJ Raji - he had a couple good years, but i'm beginning to have doubts.
Clay Matthews - blue chip for sure.
Brian Bulaga - good, but has durability issues (missed nearly 25% of possible games).
Mike Neal - really??? a guy who has played in 20 out of a possible 48 regular season games?
Morgan Burnett - another guy that i'm on the fence about. he looked good when he was playing with collins, but since then ?


out of these next five guys, only one has played two full seasons. three of them haven't even made it through one full season. how can you even judge them?

Derek Sherrod - really? ??? ? based on what?
Randal Cobb - appears to be a good value pick.
Nick Perry - haven't seen anything that makes me believe this was a good pick yet.
Jerel Worthy - worthy of a 2nd round pick? maybe. tough to tell. 14 tackles in 14 games.
Casey Hayward - based on what we saw this season, this looks like a good value pick.


the only other round 1-3 picks were alex green and darren colledge. i don't think either one has lived up to their draft status, but that is debatable.


in my opinion, and i want to stress the word "opinion", these are very mediocre results for the 27 picks that ted thompson has had to work with in rounds 1-3.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Antonio Andolini on January 27, 2013, 05:30:12 PM

i'll start with the obvious:


justin harrell
brian brohm
pat lee
terrence murphy
aaron rouse
abdul hodge
jason spitz
brandon jackson


now, let's look at your list of guys that you think have lived up to round 1-3 status:


Aaron Rodgers - best in the biz. no argument.
Nick Collins - blue chip for sure. tragic loss.
AJ Hawk - not even close to living up to a top ten draft pick. not a playmaker. a good low 2nd/high 3rd third round talent.
Greg Jennings - i'm very borderline on this, but i'll give it to you.
James Jones - great value for a third round pick.
Jordy Nelson - i like him. he's turned out better than many thought he would.
Jermichael Finley - vastly overrated and not even close to living up to the hype.
BJ Raji - he had a couple good years, but i'm beginning to have doubts.
Clay Matthews - blue chip for sure.
Brian Bulaga - good, but has durability issues (missed nearly 25% of possible games).
Mike Neal - really??? a guy who has played in 20 out of a possible 48 regular season games?
Morgan Burnett - another guy that i'm on the fence about. he looked good when he was playing with collins, but since then ?


out of these next five guys, only one has played two full seasons. three of them haven't even made it through one full season. how can you even judge them?

Derek Sherrod - really? ??? ? based on what?
Randal Cobb - appears to be a good value pick.
Nick Perry - haven't seen anything that makes me believe this was a good pick yet.
Jerel Worthy - worthy of a 2nd round pick? maybe. tough to tell. 14 tackles in 14 games.
Casey Hayward - based on what we saw this season, this looks like a good value pick.


the only other round 1-3 picks were alex green and darren colledge. i don't think either one has lived up to their draft status, but that is debatable.


in my opinion, and i want to stress the word "opinion", these are very mediocre results for the 27 picks that ted thompson has had to work with in rounds 1-3.


You are entitled to your opinion and I have agreed with a lot of what you have posted in the past, but we clearly disagree on this subject.

The 1st list of busts I'll give you. 8 busts out of 27 picks in the top 3 rds still rates TT in the elite GM category just on that batting average alone. Most GMs would love to have that success rate. The great draft guru Bill Belichik has a much higher strikeout rate in the first 3 rds (thanks for CMIII and Casey Hayward Bill!) I will say that J Spitz and B Jackson were both productive players for us, yes more was hoped for but they weren't complete busts.

Hawk-no he is not elite, but when he was drafted he was considered one of the safest, most NFL ready players in the draft. I have always contended that if he was a 2nd rd pick he would be a fan favorite, much like Demeco Ryans and D'Qwell Jackson are for their respective teams. Hawk has never missed a game due to injury and he is one of few LBs who have successfully made the transition from the 4/3 to the 3/4.

Jennings-our best receiver for the last 5 yrs, actually deserved to go to the Pro Bowls he went to, and is generally considered to be one of the top 5 WRs in the league and he was taken in the 2nd rd. If that draft were redone not only would he be taken ahead of every WR taken ahead of him, I guarantee he would be a top 10 pick. But you're "borderline" on him as a good pick. WOW! What does it take to impress you? Would we have had anywhere close to the success that we have had without him on our team the last 7 yrs?

Finley-"vastly overrated and not even close to living up to the hype" would be a fair assessment if he was a top 10 pick. He has produced better than any 3rd rd TE in a long time. Yes he is our head case player but he also just set a team record for TE production in a season. I'll take this type of talent from TT in the 3rd rd all day long.

I agree that it is too early to accurately evaluate the last 2 drafts but:

Cobb-"a good value pick" Truly high praise from you. ::) An electrifying young slot receiver that has most analysts and fans excited about what is to come. Would he get out of the 1st rd if there was a do over? Not bad for the last pick in the 2nd rd.

Hayward-"a good value pick" again I think he rates higher than that faint praise. 5th in INTs in the league, didn't give up a TD pass, and held QBs to one of the leagues lowest rating when throwing at the WR he is covering. His stats rate him as one of the top shut down corners in the league, so does the eye test. TT moved up to get him when most "experts" had a lower rating on him.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: vegas492 on January 28, 2013, 12:16:06 PM
Careful on Finley.  Plenty of stud TE's go in the third round or later.  Top of my head...

Jimmy Graham, third round.
Aaron Hernandez, third round.
Jason Witten, third round.
Antonio Gates, undrafted.
Jared Cook, third round.
Dennis Pitta, fourth round.
Owen Daniels, fourth round.

Finley was a stud before the injury.  Not so much afterwards.

Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Terranimal on January 29, 2013, 08:32:25 AM
...
TT has a proven track record of drafting really well, arguably better than any other GM in the league. ...


yeah, i would definitely argue with that. ted has a less than stellar success rate in rounds 1-3 where expectations are high, and does a pretty decent job of finding players in rounds 4-7, where less is expected. but these are not blue-chip players. these are guys who make the roster and oftentimes end up starting because we have no other choice.

Really?

Aaron Rodgers
Nick Collins
AJ Hawk
Greg Jennings
James Jones
Jordy Nelson
Jermichael Finley
BJ Raji
Clay Matthews
Brian Bulaga
Mike Neal
Morgan Burnett
Derek Sherrod
Randal Cobb
Nick Perry
Jerel Worthy
Casey Hayward

Not exactly "less than stellar", the draft is an inexact science and nobody bats a 1.000. Yes he has missed on a few but that list looks like the core of our team to me. Considering that we are usually drafting toward the end of each round, TT has done a masterful job of  selecting players with talent, that fit our scheme, have a strong work ethic, and are good team mates. Not an easy thing to do. Josh Sitton, TJ Lang, and Desmond Bishop are also really good later rd picks. You can also include Sam Shields to this list since acquiring UDFAs falls under the draft evaluation process.


i'll start with the obvious:


justin harrell
brian brohm
pat lee
terrence murphy-was looking good until the injury and forced to retire like Collins
aaron rouse
abdul hodge
jason spitz- Another player that was making the turn, until back surgery
brandon jackson


now, let's look at your list of guys that you think have lived up to round 1-3 status:


Aaron Rodgers - best in the biz. no argument.
Nick Collins - blue chip for sure. tragic loss.
AJ Hawk - not even close to living up to a top ten draft pick. not a playmaker. a good low 2nd/high 3rd third round talent.
Greg Jennings - i'm very borderline on this, but i'll give it to you. How can you be borderline on Jennings?????? He's been a top 10 NFL WR.
James Jones - great value for a third round pick.
Jordy Nelson - i like him. he's turned out better than many thought he would.
Jermichael Finley - vastly overrated and not even close to living up to the hype.
BJ Raji - he had a couple good years, but i'm beginning to have doubts.
Clay Matthews - blue chip for sure.
Brian Bulaga - good, but has durability issues (missed nearly 25% of possible games).
Mike Neal - really??? a guy who has played in 20 out of a possible 48 regular season games?
Morgan Burnett - another guy that i'm on the fence about. he looked good when he was playing with collins, but since then ?


out of these next five guys, only one has played two full seasons. three of them haven't even made it through one full season. how can you even judge them?

Derek Sherrod - really? ??? ? based on what?
Randal Cobb - appears to be a good value pick.
Nick Perry - haven't seen anything that makes me believe this was a good pick yet.
Jerel Worthy - worthy of a 2nd round pick? maybe. tough to tell. 14 tackles in 14 games.
Casey Hayward - based on what we saw this season, this looks like a good value pick.


the only other round 1-3 picks were alex green and darren colledge. i don't think either one has lived up to their draft status, but that is debatable.

Colledge was always under-rated by Pack fans. He got big money from the Cards and is one of or their best OL currently.


in my opinion, and i want to stress the word "opinion", these are very mediocre results for the 27 picks that ted thompson has had to work with in rounds 1-3.

IMO, Thompson has done better in the first 3 rounds then Wolf did when RW was here. Really the one pick questioned from the start and was sadly proven right on was Justin Harrell.

Hawk's draft was different. There wasn't much for choices when we picked, though really like Veron Davis, but it took him a few years to catch on.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Jeremy on January 29, 2013, 09:07:04 AM
...
TT has a proven track record of drafting really well, arguably better than any other GM in the league. ...


yeah, i would definitely argue with that. ted has a less than stellar success rate in rounds 1-3 where expectations are high, and does a pretty decent job of finding players in rounds 4-7, where less is expected. but these are not blue-chip players. these are guys who make the roster and oftentimes end up starting because we have no other choice.

Really?

Aaron Rodgers
Nick Collins
AJ Hawk
Greg Jennings
James Jones
Jordy Nelson
Jermichael Finley
BJ Raji
Clay Matthews
Brian Bulaga
Mike Neal
Morgan Burnett
Derek Sherrod
Randal Cobb
Nick Perry
Jerel Worthy
Casey Hayward

Not exactly "less than stellar", the draft is an inexact science and nobody bats a 1.000. Yes he has missed on a few but that list looks like the core of our team to me. Considering that we are usually drafting toward the end of each round, TT has done a masterful job of  selecting players with talent, that fit our scheme, have a strong work ethic, and are good team mates. Not an easy thing to do. Josh Sitton, TJ Lang, and Desmond Bishop are also really good later rd picks. You can also include Sam Shields to this list since acquiring UDFAs falls under the draft evaluation process.


i'll start with the obvious:


justin harrell
brian brohm
pat lee
terrence murphy
aaron rouse
abdul hodge
jason spitz
brandon jackson


now, let's look at your list of guys that you think have lived up to round 1-3 status:


Aaron Rodgers - best in the biz. no argument.
Nick Collins - blue chip for sure. tragic loss.
AJ Hawk - not even close to living up to a top ten draft pick. not a playmaker. a good low 2nd/high 3rd third round talent.
Greg Jennings - i'm very borderline on this, but i'll give it to you.
James Jones - great value for a third round pick.
Jordy Nelson - i like him. he's turned out better than many thought he would.
Jermichael Finley - vastly overrated and not even close to living up to the hype.
BJ Raji - he had a couple good years, but i'm beginning to have doubts.
Clay Matthews - blue chip for sure.
Brian Bulaga - good, but has durability issues (missed nearly 25% of possible games).
Mike Neal - really??? a guy who has played in 20 out of a possible 48 regular season games?
Morgan Burnett - another guy that i'm on the fence about. he looked good when he was playing with collins, but since then ?


out of these next five guys, only one has played two full seasons. three of them haven't even made it through one full season. how can you even judge them?

Derek Sherrod - really? ??? ? based on what?
Randal Cobb - appears to be a good value pick.
Nick Perry - haven't seen anything that makes me believe this was a good pick yet.
Jerel Worthy - worthy of a 2nd round pick? maybe. tough to tell. 14 tackles in 14 games.
Casey Hayward - based on what we saw this season, this looks like a good value pick.


the only other round 1-3 picks were alex green and darren colledge. i don't think either one has lived up to their draft status, but that is debatable.


in my opinion, and i want to stress the word "opinion", these are very mediocre results for the 27 picks that ted thompson has had to work with in rounds 1-3.

How does that compare to other GMs?  If you were to take who you would consider the best drafting GMs in the business (say Ozzie Newsome, or someone else who's done it for a while) and did the same excercize, would it look a lot better, I wonder?  I honestly don't know. 

I want to say half of the players picked in the top 10 of drafts are busts or close to busts.  So it's probably crazy to expect that kind of success rate for the top 3 ROUNDS.  But maybe you can show me a GM who does hit on that many.   
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on January 29, 2013, 09:48:43 AM
I also think that in comparing TT's hits and misses on his draft choices, you have to factor in his disdain for acquiring veteran talent through free agency or trades the past 6 years.

Whatever Ozzie Newsome's record as a drafter, the Ravens free agent acquisitions of Jacoby Jones (who caught the Hail Mary TD against the Broncos), Bernard Pollard (who literally knocked out the Patriots last hope with his crushing blow on Ridley), McKinnie and Birk (who gave Flacco so much time to throw in these playofffs), Corey Graham (a starting CB who held up pretty well against both Manning and Brady), and trade for Anquan Boldin (he of the 2 TDs in the AFC Championship game) would seem to add to his stature as a GM.

By comparison, when looking at the current roster TT acquired Pickett and Woodson back in 2006 (both critical to the Pack's Super Bowl win), traded for Grant in 2007 and signed Benson and Saturday (the former for the veteran minimum and the latter when most teams thought he was already done). Saturday has now said he will retire. There is an excellent chance that Grant and Benson will not be back and it would not be a surprise if (and I'd personally love to see) Woodson was cut given his salary. Only Pickett looks to be back for 1 or 2 more years.

I do not believe you can measure a GM based solely on his drafting and a comparison of Ozzie Newsome and TT's roster explains why.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: JimATX on January 29, 2013, 10:36:45 AM
Hawk - There were few who didn't think Hawk was the right pick at that time. The problem with AJ is that he hasn't improved one iota since his rookie year.
Finley - 3rd rounder and he's {mostly} played like a 3rd rounder.
Neal - Injuries truly hurt him early, but this past year he has again shown us why he was picked in the 2nd. I can;t call that a failed pick at this point.

Once you've played in college it does not matter where you played HS ball. Once you played in the NFL it does not matter how you got there. The fans and media may disagree with this, but GMs/Personnel guys don't.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Jeremy on January 29, 2013, 11:09:58 AM
I also think that in comparing TT's hits and misses on his draft choices, you have to factor in his disdain for acquiring veteran talent through free agency or trades the past 6 years.

Whatever Ozzie Newsome's record as a drafter, the Ravens free agent acquisitions of Jacoby Jones (who caught the Hail Mary TD against the Broncos), Bernard Pollard (who literally knocked out the Patriots last hope with his crushing blow on Ridley), McKinnie and Birk (who gave Flacco so much time to throw in these playofffs), Corey Graham (a starting CB who held up pretty well against both Manning and Brady), and trade for Anquan Boldin (he of the 2 TDs in the AFC Championship game) would seem to add to his stature as a GM.

By comparison, when looking at the current roster TT acquired Pickett and Woodson back in 2006 (both critical to the Pack's Super Bowl win), traded for Grant in 2007 and signed Benson and Saturday (the former for the veteran minimum and the latter when most teams thought he was already done). Saturday has now said he will retire. There is an excellent chance that Grant and Benson will not be back and it would not be a surprise if (and I'd personally love to see) Woodson was cut given his salary. Only Pickett looks to be back for 1 or 2 more years.

I do not believe you can measure a GM based solely on his drafting and a comparison of Ozzie Newsome and TT's roster explains why.

Well, the discussion was specifically rounds 1-3, but I agree.  But despite Ozzie's success in free agency and trades, he hasn't outshone Ted Thompson.  Even now after injuries and the salary cap realities have eroded the Packers, I think we're at least as good as the Ravens.  Granted, they're in the Superbowl and we're not, but the AFC isn't as deep as the NFC.  Had we prevailed and gotten to the SB, I think we'd be a slight favorite.  And of course the Packers have won a SB under Thompson, and the Ravens haven't yet. 

The problem with free agency is that you usually have to pay top dollar, and there's usually a reason that team doesn't want that player anymore.  If you draft well, you can get a player like Hayward or Matthews very cheap for 3 or 4 years.   As Andrew Brandt says, "free agency is the price you pay for not drafting well".  So ideally, you'd like to get as much accomplished through the draft as you can. 
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on January 29, 2013, 11:39:36 AM
I also think that in comparing TT's hits and misses on his draft choices, you have to factor in his disdain for acquiring veteran talent through free agency or trades the past 6 years.

Whatever Ozzie Newsome's record as a drafter, the Ravens free agent acquisitions of Jacoby Jones (who caught the Hail Mary TD against the Broncos), Bernard Pollard (who literally knocked out the Patriots last hope with his crushing blow on Ridley), McKinnie and Birk (who gave Flacco so much time to throw in these playofffs), Corey Graham (a starting CB who held up pretty well against both Manning and Brady), and trade for Anquan Boldin (he of the 2 TDs in the AFC Championship game) would seem to add to his stature as a GM.

By comparison, when looking at the current roster TT acquired Pickett and Woodson back in 2006 (both critical to the Pack's Super Bowl win), traded for Grant in 2007 and signed Benson and Saturday (the former for the veteran minimum and the latter when most teams thought he was already done). Saturday has now said he will retire. There is an excellent chance that Grant and Benson will not be back and it would not be a surprise if (and I'd personally love to see) Woodson was cut given his salary. Only Pickett looks to be back for 1 or 2 more years.

I do not believe you can measure a GM based solely on his drafting and a comparison of Ozzie Newsome and TT's roster explains why.

Well, the discussion was specifically rounds 1-3, but I agree.  But despite Ozzie's success in free agency and trades, he hasn't outshone Ted Thompson.  Even now after injuries and the salary cap realities have eroded the Packers, I think we're at least as good as the Ravens.  Granted, they're in the Superbowl and we're not, but the AFC isn't as deep as the NFC.  Had we prevailed and gotten to the SB, I think we'd be a slight favorite.  And of course the Packers have won a SB under Thompson, and the Ravens haven't yet. 

The problem with free agency is that you usually have to pay top dollar, and there's usually a reason that team doesn't want that player anymore.  If you draft well, you can get a player like Hayward or Matthews very cheap for 3 or 4 years.   As Andrew Brandt says, "free agency is the price you pay for not drafting well".  So ideally, you'd like to get as much accomplished through the draft as you can.

I don't know that Ozzie Newsome has "outshone" Ted Thompson. I also agree that NFC is currently more competitive than the AFC. However, the Ravens have had a serious contender in their own division Pittsburgh -- a team that has gotten to 3 Super Bowls and lost only one thumbsup) since Newsome took over as GM. We get the bumbling Bears (who to be fair have made it to one Super Bowl), the enigmatic Vikings, and the mostly hapless Lions every year. 

I take issue that in free agency you "usually have to pay top dollar" for free agents. For the big-time players, probably. For a Jacoby Jones or a Corey Graham, not so much. Many teams supplement their roster with lower-priced free agents and some like NE and the Giants have had considerable success using this method to stock their rosters for years. Moreover, a team can just as easily overpay its own players -- I submit TT has overpaid Hawk throughout his time in GB but especially on the second (inexplicable) contract.

Finally, if free agency is just the price you pay for NOT DRAFTING WELL, how do you explain the 49ers? Have the Niners not drafted well in selecting the likes of Gore, Kaepernick, James, Crabtree, V. Davis, Iupati, Davis, Staley, A. Smith, P. Willis, I. Sopoaga, N. Bowman, C. Culliver, T. Brown, D. Goldson? I submit they have drafted very well, but they have also done very well in free agency -- Justin Smith, Donte Whitner, Carlos Rogers, Randy Moss, Mario Manningham, Jonathan Goodwin. 
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Antonio Andolini on January 29, 2013, 03:52:02 PM
Finally, if free agency is just the price you pay for NOT DRAFTING WELL, how do you explain the 49ers? Have the Niners not drafted well in selecting the likes of Gore, Kaepernick, James, Crabtree, V. Davis, Iupati, Davis, Staley, A. Smith, P. Willis, I. Sopoaga, N. Bowman, C. Culliver, T. Brown, D. Goldson? I submit they have drafted very well, but they have also done very well in free agency -- Justin Smith, Donte Whitner, Carlos Rogers, Randy Moss, Mario Manningham, Jonathan Goodwin.

Justin Smith was signed in '08 because they had failed to get DEs in the draft. At the time Smith signed to become one of the highest paid DEs in the league. For a guy who over 7 years averaged 6 sacks a year and was coming off a 2 sack yr and was a 4/3 DE. Kentwan Balmer 1st rd, Ray McDonald 3rd rd, Anthony Adams 2nd rd, and Andrew Williams 3rd rd were the players selected to fill his role before him. They all failed. The 49ers had also sucked for almost a decade and were desperate to improve. It has worked out well but the bad drafting before this lead to his signing.

Donte Whitner's signing was necessitated by busting on Taylor Mays in the 2nd rd. Carlos Rodgers need to be signed because the only recent high pick on a CB was Reggie Smith 3rd rd a couple of years before. They desperately needed CBs because they could not address the issue effectively in the draft.

They needed to sign Moss and Manningham because they had zero depth at WR and Crabtree had seriously under preformed before this year.

This was a team with many holes for many years, they couldn't address all of their needs in the draft so they had no choice but to go out and sign FAs. At that same time we had a deep roster with far fewer holes and the better veteran talent on our team was being paid well. FAs wasn't as big of a need and our $ was being spent else where.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on January 29, 2013, 04:18:25 PM
Finally, if free agency is just the price you pay for NOT DRAFTING WELL, how do you explain the 49ers? Have the Niners not drafted well in selecting the likes of Gore, Kaepernick, James, Crabtree, V. Davis, Iupati, Davis, Staley, A. Smith, P. Willis, I. Sopoaga, N. Bowman, C. Culliver, T. Brown, D. Goldson? I submit they have drafted very well, but they have also done very well in free agency -- Justin Smith, Donte Whitner, Carlos Rogers, Randy Moss, Mario Manningham, Jonathan Goodwin.

Justin Smith was signed in '08 because they had failed to get DEs in the draft. At the time Smith signed to become one of the highest paid DEs in the league. For a guy who over 7 years averaged 6 sacks a year and was coming off a 2 sack yr and was a 4/3 DE. Kentwan Balmer 1st rd, Ray McDonald 3rd rd, Anthony Adams 2nd rd, and Andrew Williams 3rd rd were the players selected to fill his role before him. They all failed. The 49ers had also sucked for almost a decade and were desperate to improve. It has worked out well but the bad drafting before this lead to his signing.

Donte Whitner's signing was necessitated by busting on Taylor Mays in the 2nd rd. Carlos Rodgers need to be signed because the only recent high pick on a CB was Reggie Smith 3rd rd a couple of years before. They desperately needed CBs because they could not address the issue effectively in the draft.

They needed to sign Moss and Manningham because they had zero depth at WR and Crabtree had seriously under preformed before this year.

This was a team with many holes for many years, they couldn't address all of their needs in the draft so they had no choice but to go out and sign FAs. At that same time we had a deep roster with far fewer holes and the better veteran talent on our team was being paid well. FAs wasn't as big of a need and our $ was being spent else where.

You characterize the Niners as "desperate" to sign FAs because of failed draft picks, and believe the Pack has had no reason to sign FAs because GB had far fewer holes than did the Niners when these signings took place (including Moss and Manningham last offseason).

And therein lies the $64,000 question, AT THIS TIME (not some unspecified time in the past) do the Packers still have "far fewer holes and the better veteran talent on [their] team" than the Niners or even the Seahawks? Even the most fanatical Packer fan would have to concede the Niners have more talent.

Moreover, our deficiencies at Safety, DLine, and LB have been evident for at least 2 years and even if TT devotes yet another draft to the D, i doubt he can address "all of their needs" through the draft alone. (Not to mention the issues at RB, C, and LT -- I mean aren't Brandon Jackson, Alex Green, and James Starks personifications of TT's failure to draft an adequate RB?)

Given the reality of the Pack's roster shortcomings AT THIS TIME do you believe TT will attempt to acquire (via free agency or trade) genuine veteran talent (not a Saturday stopgap or bargain basement Benson) like the Niners did? Me neither.

Unlike the Niners, we seem content to sink or swim with our draftees and (for some reason UDFAs like Walden). We shall see if it works any better in 2013.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on January 29, 2013, 05:54:03 PM
Finally, if free agency is just the price you pay for NOT DRAFTING WELL, how do you explain the 49ers? Have the Niners not drafted well in selecting the likes of Gore, Kaepernick, James, Crabtree, V. Davis, Iupati, Davis, Staley, A. Smith, P. Willis, I. Sopoaga, N. Bowman, C. Culliver, T. Brown, D. Goldson? I submit they have drafted very well, but they have also done very well in free agency -- Justin Smith, Donte Whitner, Carlos Rogers, Randy Moss, Mario Manningham, Jonathan Goodwin.

Justin Smith was signed in '08 because they had failed to get DEs in the draft. At the time Smith signed to become one of the highest paid DEs in the league. For a guy who over 7 years averaged 6 sacks a year and was coming off a 2 sack yr and was a 4/3 DE. Kentwan Balmer 1st rd, Ray McDonald 3rd rd, Anthony Adams 2nd rd, and Andrew Williams 3rd rd were the players selected to fill his role before him. They all failed. The 49ers had also sucked for almost a decade and were desperate to improve. It has worked out well but the bad drafting before this lead to his signing.

Donte Whitner's signing was necessitated by busting on Taylor Mays in the 2nd rd. Carlos Rodgers need to be signed because the only recent high pick on a CB was Reggie Smith 3rd rd a couple of years before. They desperately needed CBs because they could not address the issue effectively in the draft.

They needed to sign Moss and Manningham because they had zero depth at WR and Crabtree had seriously under preformed before this year.

This was a team with many holes for many years, they couldn't address all of their needs in the draft so they had no choice but to go out and sign FAs. At that same time we had a deep roster with far fewer holes and the better veteran talent on our team was being paid well. FAs wasn't as big of a need and our $ was being spent else where.

You characterize the Niners as "desperate" to sign FAs because of failed draft picks, and believe the Pack has had no reason to sign FAs because GB had far fewer holes than did the Niners when these signings took place (including Moss and Manningham last offseason).

And therein lies the $64,000 question, AT THIS TIME (not some unspecified time in the past) do the Packers still have "far fewer holes and the better veteran talent on [their] team" than the Niners or even the Seahawks? Even the most fanatical Packer fan would have to concede the Niners have more talent.

Moreover, our deficiencies at Safety, DLine, and LB have been evident for at least 2 years and even if TT devotes yet another draft to the D, i doubt he can address "all of their needs" through the draft alone. (Not to mention the issues at RB, C, and LT -- I mean aren't Brandon Jackson, Alex Green, and James Starks personifications of TT's failure to draft an adequate RB?)

Given the reality of the Pack's roster shortcomings AT THIS TIME do you believe TT will attempt to acquire (via free agency or trade) genuine veteran talent (not a Saturday stopgap or bargain basement Benson) like the Niners did? Me neither.

Unlike the Niners, we seem content to sink or swim with our draftees and (for some reason UDFAs like Walden). We shall see if it works any better in 2013.

not only do the 49ers have more talent on their roster, i would go so far as to say that there are fewer than a half dozen packers that would be starters for the 49ers. they have out-drafted, out-traded, out-freeagented, and out-developed the packers in almost every area.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Antonio Andolini on January 29, 2013, 08:18:55 PM
not only do the 49ers have more talent on their roster, i would go so far as to say that there are fewer than a half dozen packers that would be starters for the 49ers. they have out-drafted, out-traded, out-freeagented, and out-developed the packers in almost every area.

Ok I'll bite, just because I think it'll be an interesting exercise.

QB: Rodgers>Kaepernick
RB:  Harris<Gore
#1WR  Jennings>Crabtree
#2WR  Nelson>Manningham
#3WR  Jones>Moss
#4WR  Cobb>Ginn
TE  Finley<Davis
LT  Newhouse<Staley
LG  Lang<Iupati
C  EDS<Goodwin
RG  Sitton>Boone
RT  Bulaga>Davis

DE Wilson<J. Smith
NT  Raji>Sopoaga
DE  Pickett>McDonald
OLB  CMIII>Brooks
ILB  Hawk<Willis
ILB  Bishop<Bowman
OLB  Perry<A. Smith
CB  Williams>Rodgers
CB  Shields>Brown
CB  Hayward>Culliver
FS  Burnett<Gholdson
SS  McMillan<Whitner

13 Packers starting over 49ers out of 24 positions, I know this is subjective but I tried to be unbiased in my evaluation. The close calls: Bulaga>Davis, Raji>Sopoaga, Williams>Rodgers, Burnett<Gholdson
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on January 29, 2013, 08:46:02 PM
ARod > CK
Gore > Harris
Miller > Kuhn
Crabtree > Jennings
Cobb > Manningham
Davis > Finley
Davis > Bulaga
Sitton > Boone
Goodwin > EDS
Iupati > Lang
Staley > Newhouse
McDonald = Pickett
Raji > Sopoaga
Smith > Wilson
Brooks > Perry/Walden/Zombo/Moses
Willis >>>> Hawk
Bowman > Bishop
Matthews = A. Smith
Rogers > T. Williams
Shields >  Brown
Whitner > Burnett
Goldson > Jennings
Lee P > Masthay
Crosby = Akers -- they both stink

I have 5 Packers being better than their Niner opposites and 3 being equal out of 24 positions.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Antonio Andolini on January 29, 2013, 09:26:50 PM
I can see how you differed on the choices and its not a huge debate. Crabtree only has one year of playing well vs Jennings years of being a top 5 WR in the league, but Jennings was injured this year. I think Tramon is a better cover corner than Rodgers, Carlos had some serious struggles this year, far more than Tramon. Even though we both rated Gholdson>Burnett, I would rather have Burnett at this point in their careers. I believe the ceiling is higher on Burnett. Gholdson has some serious limitations in coverage, his INT total lead him to be voted to the Pro Bowl and got him a high franchise tag salary. Picks alone are the easiest way for a safety to be over rated and therefor over paid, that is my opinion of Dashon. Since teams run so many 3 and 4 WR sets, I think it is important to include those WRs and CBs in the ranking, all of them are Packers IMO. I forgot to list House>Brock at dime CB.

I see what you are saying overall and there is no debating the fact that the 49ers have built a talented team that has gotten them to the SB. Will they win it all? They are certainly talented enough to do it. After 2 seasons of success, can they maintain their high level of play for the next two seasons. That's where the Packers are in relation to where the 49ers are, 2 seasons removed from our SB. Will their FA acquisitions have aged out of the league in 2 years? Will they have had to let some of their young ascending players walk in FA because they are paying higher prices for the veterans that they brought in. So far TTs model of draft and develop has kept us at a relatively high level for a while now. I dance with who brung me. ;D
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on January 30, 2013, 06:34:33 AM
I mostly agree with your points above Antonio.

I do disagree, however, with those who contend that TT does not have an aversion to acquiring bona tide veteran NFL players, whether via trade or free agency.

I also note that TT's aversion is not shared by Balt., SF, NE, Atl., or the NY Giants.

Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Antonio Andolini on January 30, 2013, 10:23:35 AM
I do disagree, however, with those who contend that TT does not have an aversion to acquiring bona tide veteran NFL players, whether via trade or free agency.

I also note that TT's aversion is not shared by Balt., SF, NE, Atl., or the NY Giants.

I think it would be hard to deny that is true. My theory is that TT sees too high of a bust rate for signing free agents. Maybe he wonders how they will fit on a different team. He knows that rookies will have to have an attitude of learning/improving, while a proven good veteran might expect the team to use him just as he's always been used.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Beast Light on January 30, 2013, 10:51:55 AM
How many notable players have we lost to Free Agency over the years?

Wells, Jenkins, Colledge ....are there any others?
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: GBkrzygrl on January 30, 2013, 11:12:53 AM
I do disagree, however, with those who contend that TT does not have an aversion to acquiring bona tide veteran NFL players, whether via trade or free agency.

I also note that TT's aversion is not shared by Balt., SF, NE, Atl., or the NY Giants.

I think it would be hard to deny that is true. My theory is that TT sees too high of a bust rate for signing free agents. Maybe he wonders how they will fit on a different team. He knows that rookies will have to have an attitude of learning/improving, while a proven good veteran might expect the team to use him just as he's always been used.


Probably one of my dumber questions....Has TT ever said Why he does not use FA more?
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: vegas492 on January 30, 2013, 11:23:04 AM
Finally, if free agency is just the price you pay for NOT DRAFTING WELL, how do you explain the 49ers? Have the Niners not drafted well in selecting the likes of Gore, Kaepernick, James, Crabtree, V. Davis, Iupati, Davis, Staley, A. Smith, P. Willis, I. Sopoaga, N. Bowman, C. Culliver, T. Brown, D. Goldson? I submit they have drafted very well, but they have also done very well in free agency -- Justin Smith, Donte Whitner, Carlos Rogers, Randy Moss, Mario Manningham, Jonathan Goodwin.

Justin Smith was signed in '08 because they had failed to get DEs in the draft. At the time Smith signed to become one of the highest paid DEs in the league. For a guy who over 7 years averaged 6 sacks a year and was coming off a 2 sack yr and was a 4/3 DE. Kentwan Balmer 1st rd, Ray McDonald 3rd rd, Anthony Adams 2nd rd, and Andrew Williams 3rd rd were the players selected to fill his role before him. They all failed. The 49ers had also sucked for almost a decade and were desperate to improve. It has worked out well but the bad drafting before this lead to his signing.

Donte Whitner's signing was necessitated by busting on Taylor Mays in the 2nd rd. Carlos Rodgers need to be signed because the only recent high pick on a CB was Reggie Smith 3rd rd a couple of years before. They desperately needed CBs because they could not address the issue effectively in the draft.

They needed to sign Moss and Manningham because they had zero depth at WR and Crabtree had seriously under preformed before this year.

This was a team with many holes for many years, they couldn't address all of their needs in the draft so they had no choice but to go out and sign FAs. At that same time we had a deep roster with far fewer holes and the better veteran talent on our team was being paid well. FAs wasn't as big of a need and our $ was being spent else where.

You characterize the Niners as "desperate" to sign FAs because of failed draft picks, and believe the Pack has had no reason to sign FAs because GB had far fewer holes than did the Niners when these signings took place (including Moss and Manningham last offseason).

And therein lies the $64,000 question, AT THIS TIME (not some unspecified time in the past) do the Packers still have "far fewer holes and the better veteran talent on [their] team" than the Niners or even the Seahawks? Even the most fanatical Packer fan would have to concede the Niners have more talent.

Moreover, our deficiencies at Safety, DLine, and LB have been evident for at least 2 years and even if TT devotes yet another draft to the D, i doubt he can address "all of their needs" through the draft alone. (Not to mention the issues at RB, C, and LT -- I mean aren't Brandon Jackson, Alex Green, and James Starks personifications of TT's failure to draft an adequate RB?)

Given the reality of the Pack's roster shortcomings AT THIS TIME do you believe TT will attempt to acquire (via free agency or trade) genuine veteran talent (not a Saturday stopgap or bargain basement Benson) like the Niners did? Me neither.

Unlike the Niners, we seem content to sink or swim with our draftees and (for some reason UDFAs like Walden). We shall see if it works any better in 2013.

not only do the 49ers have more talent on their roster, i would go so far as to say that there are fewer than a half dozen packers that would be starters for the 49ers. they have out-drafted, out-traded, out-freeagented, and out-developed the packers in almost every area.

Challenge accepted!

QB: Rodgers over CK. (1)
RB: Gore
FB: who cares
WR: GJ, Nelson, Cobb, Jones vs. Crabtree and whoever else, Moss/Manningham.  GJ (2) for sure.  Nelson (3), Cobb (4). 
TE: Davis, no brainer.
OL: All 5 go to San Fran.  Maybe Sitton would start for them. Maybe
DL: Raji would play the nose for them (5).  No one else makes the cut.
OLB: Matthews would start (6). No one else.
ILB: I chuckle just to think about it.
CB: I think Tramon plays over their #2 corner.  I think Shields does too.  I'll give Sam (7), and if not him, Hayward.
Safety: None.
Punter: Doesn't count.
Kicker: Pick your poison.

So, I get 7.  I truly thought I would get more.  And that is if you give me all the WR's versus San Frans #2.  But if you look at #2 and #3 corner, we have them.  So, I have to agree with your statement above.

...And you didn't mention coaching.  Big plus on their side for that one....
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Jeremy on January 30, 2013, 11:45:43 AM
I do disagree, however, with those who contend that TT does not have an aversion to acquiring bona tide veteran NFL players, whether via trade or free agency.

I also note that TT's aversion is not shared by Balt., SF, NE, Atl., or the NY Giants.

I think it would be hard to deny that is true. My theory is that TT sees too high of a bust rate for signing free agents. Maybe he wonders how they will fit on a different team. He knows that rookies will have to have an attitude of learning/improving, while a proven good veteran might expect the team to use him just as he's always been used.


Probably one of my dumber questions....Has TT ever said Why he does not use FA more?

I don't know if I've ever heard him speak on it other than to say that that they have a draft and develope philosophy.  I know there's a lot of evidence that the ROI from high priced free agents is very low.  Some work out, like Woodson.  But most don't.  I guess they actually have a presentation every year at owners meetings illustrating that fact. 
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on January 30, 2013, 12:40:43 PM
I do disagree, however, with those who contend that TT does not have an aversion to acquiring bona tide veteran NFL players, whether via trade or free agency.

I also note that TT's aversion is not shared by Balt., SF, NE, Atl., or the NY Giants.

I think it would be hard to deny that is true. My theory is that TT sees too high of a bust rate for signing free agents. Maybe he wonders how they will fit on a different team. He knows that rookies will have to have an attitude of learning/improving, while a proven good veteran might expect the team to use him just as he's always been used.


Probably one of my dumber questions....Has TT ever said Why he does not use FA more?

I don't know if I've ever heard him speak on it other than to say that that they have a draft and develope philosophy.  I know there's a lot of evidence that the ROI from high priced free agents is very low.  Some work out, like Woodson.  But most don't.  I guess they actually have a presentation every year at owners meetings illustrating that fact.

"We're going to attack free agency just like everybody does. You try to find the guys that can fit a role for your team. (But) I've said this over and over, and I hate to be a broken record: I think it's very dangerous waters to go out and spend beaucoup bucks on someone from some other team."

"We've had some losses. But I think we've helped ourselves a little bit in free agency. I don't think just because you have cap room you need to go out and spend a lot of money on players that aren't worthy of that money. We might do some more before it's all said and done."

“Obviously, you're always wishing you could go out and sign a Reggie White, but those players don't make it to free agency anymore, ... So you kind of do what you can and outside of that you work hard and get everybody on the same page with the defensive coordinator. And hope it all works.”

“I think we'll do some of that. But back then there were only 30 teams instead of 32 and there was more available talent. It's not because we're not looking. It just has to make sense. We've seen some interesting prospects.”

"No. 1, often times the grass is not greener. And secondly, I think your existing players feel like they've been slighted because you didn't take care of them when you took care of someone else. But I do think there will be opportunities to add players to our team that can come in and play a role and help our team get better."

“Do I think we're going to make a trade? No. We're calling and talking to people and things like that, but no.”
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Pugger on February 11, 2013, 10:25:15 AM
...
TT has a proven track record of drafting really well, arguably better than any other GM in the league. ...


yeah, i would definitely argue with that. ted has a less than stellar success rate in rounds 1-3 where expectations are high, and does a pretty decent job of finding players in rounds 4-7, where less is expected. but these are not blue-chip players. these are guys who make the roster and oftentimes end up starting because we have no other choice.

Really?

Aaron Rodgers
Nick Collins
AJ Hawk
Greg Jennings
James Jones
Jordy Nelson
Jermichael Finley
BJ Raji
Clay Matthews
Brian Bulaga
Mike Neal
Morgan Burnett
Derek Sherrod
Randal Cobb
Nick Perry
Jerel Worthy
Casey Hayward

Not exactly "less than stellar", the draft is an inexact science and nobody bats a 1.000. Yes he has missed on a few but that list looks like the core of our team to me. Considering that we are usually drafting toward the end of each round, TT has done a masterful job of  selecting players with talent, that fit our scheme, have a strong work ethic, and are good team mates. Not an easy thing to do. Josh Sitton, TJ Lang, and Desmond Bishop are also really good later rd picks. You can also include Sam Shields to this list since acquiring UDFAs falls under the draft evaluation process.


i'll start with the obvious:


justin harrell
brian brohm
pat lee
terrence murphy
aaron rouse
abdul hodge
jason spitz
brandon jackson


now, let's look at your list of guys that you think have lived up to round 1-3 status:


Aaron Rodgers - best in the biz. no argument.
Nick Collins - blue chip for sure. tragic loss.
AJ Hawk - not even close to living up to a top ten draft pick. not a playmaker. a good low 2nd/high 3rd third round talent.
Greg Jennings - i'm very borderline on this, but i'll give it to you.
James Jones - great value for a third round pick.
Jordy Nelson - i like him. he's turned out better than many thought he would.
Jermichael Finley - vastly overrated and not even close to living up to the hype.
BJ Raji - he had a couple good years, but i'm beginning to have doubts.
Clay Matthews - blue chip for sure.
Brian Bulaga - good, but has durability issues (missed nearly 25% of possible games).
Mike Neal - really??? a guy who has played in 20 out of a possible 48 regular season games?
Morgan Burnett - another guy that i'm on the fence about. he looked good when he was playing with collins, but since then ?


out of these next five guys, only one has played two full seasons. three of them haven't even made it through one full season. how can you even judge them?

Derek Sherrod - really? ??? ? based on what?
Randal Cobb - appears to be a good value pick.
Nick Perry - haven't seen anything that makes me believe this was a good pick yet.
Jerel Worthy - worthy of a 2nd round pick? maybe. tough to tell. 14 tackles in 14 games.
Casey Hayward - based on what we saw this season, this looks like a good value pick.


the only other round 1-3 picks were alex green and darren colledge. i don't think either one has lived up to their draft status, but that is debatable.


in my opinion, and i want to stress the word "opinion", these are very mediocre results for the 27 picks that ted thompson has had to work with in rounds 1-3.

How does that compare to other GMs?  If you were to take who you would consider the best drafting GMs in the business (say Ozzie Newsome, or someone else who's done it for a while) and did the same excercize, would it look a lot better, I wonder?  I honestly don't know. 

I want to say half of the players picked in the top 10 of drafts are busts or close to busts.  So it's probably crazy to expect that kind of success rate for the top 3 ROUNDS.  But maybe you can show me a GM who does hit on that many.

There is one large football site online that has fans from every team.  Each team has its own forum at this site.  It has general football forums there also.  In their NFL Comparisons forum there is a thread going right now listing the top 5 GMs in the game today and TT is consistently mentioned in that top 5 or given honorable mention by the posters there who are not Packer fans.   EVERY GM has busts.  The top ones have more hits than misses.  The draft is a crap shoot.  Just because a kid was great in college doesn't mean he'll be wonderful in the pros.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: rpiotr01 on February 11, 2013, 10:51:49 AM

So, I get 7.  I truly thought I would get more.  And that is if you give me all the WR's versus San Frans #2.  But if you look at #2 and #3 corner, we have them.  So, I have to agree with your statement above.

...And you didn't mention coaching.  Big plus on their side for that one....

They have so much more talent than us, and yet there we were, a mere 12-13 defensive stops and 4-5 blown coverages away from pulling an upset on the road against the mighty 49ers.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on February 11, 2013, 12:44:21 PM

So, I get 7.  I truly thought I would get more.  And that is if you give me all the WR's versus San Frans #2.  But if you look at #2 and #3 corner, we have them.  So, I have to agree with your statement above.

...And you didn't mention coaching.  Big plus on their side for that one....

They have so much more talent than us, and yet there we were, a mere 12-13 defensive stops and 4-5 blown coverages away from pulling an upset on the road against the mighty 49ers.

 hysterical
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Pugger on February 12, 2013, 05:46:15 AM
ARod > CK
Gore > Harris
Miller > Kuhn
Crabtree > Jennings
Cobb > Manningham
Davis > Finley
Davis > Bulaga
Sitton > Boone
Goodwin > EDS
Iupati > Lang
Staley > Newhouse
McDonald = Pickett
Raji > Sopoaga
Smith > Wilson
Brooks > Perry/Walden/Zombo/Moses
Willis >>>> Hawk
Bowman > Bishop
Matthews = A. Smith
Rogers > T. Williams
Shields >  Brown
Whitner > Burnett
Goldson > Jennings
Lee P > Masthay
Crosby = Akers -- they both stink

I have 5 Packers being better than their Niner opposites and 3 being equal out of 24 positions.

I'd like to see if the 49ers can win their division if their past 3 first round draft picks were on IR.  Last season besides J. Smith they were ridiculously healthy.  This cannot be overstated.  Plus over the past few years because SF was so lousy they were picking in the top half of each round  so they better find great players.  We really aren't that far away.  We need to get a few guys back off of IR and plug in a couple of spots and we'll be just as dangerous as they are.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: JimATX on February 12, 2013, 07:24:48 AM

"We feel very strongly that our best policy is to draft the best player. This isn't fantasy football."

"I know (people) don't believe me, but we're always active in free agency. There have been a couple years here in a row that we haven't actually signed anybody. It doesn't mean we weren't active pursuing leads, trying to understand the market, doing all that. In the case of Jeff Saturday we were able to address a specific need that we felt like we needed to address because we were unable to sign Scott ( Wells)."


Ted Thompson
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on February 12, 2013, 03:51:47 PM

"We feel very strongly that our best policy is to draft the best player. This isn't fantasy football."

"I know (people) don't believe me, but we're always active in free agency. There have been a couple years here in a row that we haven't actually signed anybody. It doesn't mean we weren't active pursuing leads, trying to understand the market, doing all that. In the case of Jeff Saturday we were able to address a specific need that we felt like we needed to address because we were unable to sign Scott ( Wells)."


Ted Thompson

If by being "active" in free agency TT means he makes sure to monitor which free agents sign with other teams in case there are some dogs left over who no other team wants, then I don't see how anyone can claim he is not active in free agency.

I mean while he has not signed a player of note since Woodson/Pickett way back in 2006, who can forget immortal free agents like Frank Walker and Anthony Smith who TT snagged several years ago?

And how could anyone accuse TT of not being "active" in free agency when he landed Hargrove, Muir, Merling, Benson, and, the cherry on top of the ice cream, Jeff Saturday just last offseason. What a sterling quintet of free agents they turned out to be.   
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: TAYLORBOY on February 14, 2013, 01:42:18 PM
I'd like :

Desmond Bryant, DT, Raiders: He didn't get the attention that Richard Seymour and Tommy Kelly got on the Raiders line, but this 25-year-old is coming off a nice season. He had four sacks and the tape showed a lot of him collapsing the pocket. He is going to get a nice deal from a team looking for a young power player.

Height/Weight:6-6/311
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Birthdate:12/15/1985
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Age:27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hometown:Shorewood, IL, USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
School:Harvard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NFL Experience:3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Awards:
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: cpk1994 on February 16, 2013, 06:51:25 AM
TT doesn't sign many name FAs but he isn't opposed to signing UDFAs.  We've found a couple of gems this way (Sheilds and Barclay e.g.).

TT has not signed any NAME free agents since 2006 (unless you count an obviously over-the-hill Saturday or past his prime Benson, both of who had NAMES but came on the cheap). TT also has not traded for a single NFL veteran player since 2007 (when he got Ryan Grant for a 7th round pick).

The record reveals TT has an aversion to adding NFL VETERAN talent to the team.

I certainly agree that he does, however, seem to relish signing undrafted/street free agents like Shields, T. Williams, D. Harris, D. Barclay and E. Walden.
The record also shows he had the highest offer on the table for Lavar Arrington and Adam Vinitieri, but they took money elsewhere. 

Also, not trading for players isn't a big deal because it is a rarity in the league as a whole. Ron Wolf didn't trade that often either.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: cpk1994 on February 16, 2013, 06:56:00 AM

If by being "active" in free agency TT means he makes sure to monitor which free agents sign with other teams in case there are some dogs left over who no other team wants, then I don't see how anyone can claim he is not active in free agency.

I mean while he has not signed a player of note since Woodson/Pickett way back in 2006, who can forget immortal free agents like Frank Walker and Anthony Smith who TT snagged several years ago?

And how could anyone accuse TT of not being "active" in free agency when he landed Hargrove, Muir, Merling, Benson, and, the cherry on top of the ice cream, Jeff Saturday just last offseason. What a sterling quintet of free agents they turned out to be.
This is pure nonsense.  You don't have to sign someone to be "active" in FA. You have no idea what FA TT is actually interested in. As he has said, when evaluating FA it has to be the right fit and he isn't going to get in a huge bidding war. But to sit there and claim that he must be sitting on his hands doing nothing because he doesn't sign anyone is incredibly short-sighted and is blatantly false.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on February 16, 2013, 07:45:16 AM

If by being "active" in free agency TT means he makes sure to monitor which free agents sign with other teams in case there are some dogs left over who no other team wants, then I don't see how anyone can claim he is not active in free agency.

I mean while he has not signed a player of note since Woodson/Pickett way back in 2006, who can forget immortal free agents like Frank Walker and Anthony Smith who TT snagged several years ago?

And how could anyone accuse TT of not being "active" in free agency when he landed Hargrove, Muir, Merling, Benson, and, the cherry on top of the ice cream, Jeff Saturday just last offseason. What a sterling quintet of free agents they turned out to be.
This is pure nonsense.  You don't have to sign someone to be "active" in FA. You have no idea what FA TT is actually interested in. As he has said, when evaluating FA it has to be the right fit and he isn't going to get in a huge bidding war. But to sit there and claim that he must be sitting on his hands doing nothing because he doesn't sign anyone is incredibly short-sighted and is blatantly false.

And neither do you have no idea what veteran FAs, if any, TT is interested in. However, the FACTS reveal (a) that TT has not signed many free agent since 2006 and (b) the FAs he has signed since 2006 have had almost no impact.

I know some Packer fans considered last year's signings of Muir, Hargrove (neither of whom played a down in the NFL last season), Merling (who played about 20 snaps in GB and then was out of the league), Saturday (an obviously washed up and unqualified replacement for Wells), and Benson (who was such a hot commodity he remained unsigned when training camps opened in July) to constitute "significant" free agent activity. Maybe for TT but not by NFL standards.

Anyway, I certainly never said TT was sitting on his hands as I have repeatedly pointed out the 5 free agent signings above that TT made last season. I merely pointed out that Packer fans getting excited about top or even mid-tier FAs are looking at the wrong pool of players. They should instead be focusing on this year's Daniel Muir or Anthony Smith or Frank Walker or Duke Preston or Jeff Saturday. In other words the bottom of the barrel type players TT has signed since 2006.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on February 16, 2013, 07:48:49 AM
TT doesn't sign many name FAs but he isn't opposed to signing UDFAs.  We've found a couple of gems this way (Sheilds and Barclay e.g.).

TT has not signed any NAME free agents since 2006 (unless you count an obviously over-the-hill Saturday or past his prime Benson, both of who had NAMES but came on the cheap). TT also has not traded for a single NFL veteran player since 2007 (when he got Ryan Grant for a 7th round pick).

The record reveals TT has an aversion to adding NFL VETERAN talent to the team.

I certainly agree that he does, however, seem to relish signing undrafted/street free agents like Shields, T. Williams, D. Harris, D. Barclay and E. Walden.
The record also shows he had the highest offer on the table for Lavar Arrington and Adam Vinitieri, but they took money elsewhere. 

Also, not trading for players isn't a big deal because it is a rarity in the league as a whole. Ron Wolf didn't trade that often either.

Did Ron Wolf trade for Brett Favre? Did he trade for Keith Jackson? How about Eugene Robinson?

How was the guy who caught two TDs for the Ravens Anquan Boldin acquired? Couldn't have been via trade could it?
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on February 16, 2013, 07:54:16 AM
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packsid16-5n8q0r5-191497901.html (http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packsid16-5n8q0r5-191497901.html)
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Twain on February 16, 2013, 08:05:57 AM
Comparing TT to Wolf doesn't seem fair to me. 

Wolf was there at the start of the free agency phenomenon, an I believe was a classic "early adopter" of the change.  He figured it out and exploited it before others figured it out.

It is a different situation now.  In some ways, TT may have figured out the dangers of free agency better than others.  I understand that SF and Baltimore have had success with it, but the thing we aren't talking about is the number of losing teams that use free agency and still are losers.

Sure, I would like to see us score a home run on free agency.  I just think it is harder to do these days.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Pugger on February 17, 2013, 07:08:29 AM
Comparing TT to Wolf doesn't seem fair to me. 

Wolf was there at the start of the free agency phenomenon, an I believe was a classic "early adopter" of the change.  He figured it out and exploited it before others figured it out.

It is a different situation now.  In some ways, TT may have figured out the dangers of free agency better than others.  I understand that SF and Baltimore have had success with it, but the thing we aren't talking about is the number of losing teams that use free agency and still are losers.

Sure, I would like to see us score a home run on free agency.  I just think it is harder to do these days.

I'm with you.  Except for a couple of guys who will cost a fortune there is a reason why most FAs are available.   

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2013/1/29/3926974/super-bowl-2013-rosters
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on February 17, 2013, 07:47:15 AM
Comparing TT to Wolf doesn't seem fair to me. 

Wolf was there at the start of the free agency phenomenon, an I believe was a classic "early adopter" of the change.  He figured it out and exploited it before others figured it out.

It is a different situation now.  In some ways, TT may have figured out the dangers of free agency better than others.  I understand that SF and Baltimore have had success with it, but the thing we aren't talking about is the number of losing teams that use free agency and still are losers.

Sure, I would like to see us score a home run on free agency.  I just think it is harder to do these days.

I'm with you.  Except for a couple of guys who will cost a fortune there is a reason why most FAs are available.   

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2013/1/29/3926974/super-bowl-2013-rosters (http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2013/1/29/3926974/super-bowl-2013-rosters)


i'm not sure i understand the relevance of that link to your comment. the article that you linked to shows that the ravens have 14 players and the 49ers have 17 players who originally played for some other team. only four packers on the 2012 roster ever played a significant number of snaps for another team.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Pugger on February 17, 2013, 11:12:40 AM
 confused(
Comparing TT to Wolf doesn't seem fair to me. 

Wolf was there at the start of the free agency phenomenon, an I believe was a classic "early adopter" of the change.  He figured it out and exploited it before others figured it out.

It is a different situation now.  In some ways, TT may have figured out the dangers of free agency better than others.  I understand that SF and Baltimore have had success with it, but the thing we aren't talking about is the number of losing teams that use free agency and still are losers.

Sure, I would like to see us score a home run on free agency.  I just think it is harder to do these days.

I'm with you.  Except for a couple of guys who will cost a fortune there is a reason why most FAs are available.   

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2013/1/29/3926974/super-bowl-2013-rosters (http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2013/1/29/3926974/super-bowl-2013-rosters)


i'm not sure i understand the relevance of that link to your comment. the article that you linked to shows that the ravens have 14 players and the 49ers have 17 players who originally played for some other team. only four packers on the 2012 roster ever played a significant number of snaps for another team.

Unless I read that article wrong it appeared most of the players on these rosters were built along the same lines that TT advocates.   confused(
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on February 18, 2013, 01:07:21 PM
confused(
Comparing TT to Wolf doesn't seem fair to me. 

Wolf was there at the start of the free agency phenomenon, an I believe was a classic "early adopter" of the change.  He figured it out and exploited it before others figured it out.

It is a different situation now.  In some ways, TT may have figured out the dangers of free agency better than others.  I understand that SF and Baltimore have had success with it, but the thing we aren't talking about is the number of losing teams that use free agency and still are losers.

Sure, I would like to see us score a home run on free agency.  I just think it is harder to do these days.

I'm with you.  Except for a couple of guys who will cost a fortune there is a reason why most FAs are available.   

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2013/1/29/3926974/super-bowl-2013-rosters (http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2013/1/29/3926974/super-bowl-2013-rosters)


i'm not sure i understand the relevance of that link to your comment. the article that you linked to shows that the ravens have 14 players and the 49ers have 17 players who originally played for some other team. only four packers on the 2012 roster ever played a significant number of snaps for another team.
http://forum.packerchatters.com/Themes/Packers_2/images/bbc/underline.gif

Unless I read that article wrong it appeared most of the players on these rosters were built along the same lines that TT advocates.   

MOST players on every team in the NFL arrives via the draft or as undrafted/street free agents -- the same lines TT advocates.

Where the Ravens and 49ers (and Patriots and Giants) deviate from TT's approach to roster building is that in addition to the draft and UDFAs they sign UFAs and even make trades for veteran players. Ravens Super Bowl starters (not backups) who were acquired this way included LT Bryant McKinnie, C Matt Birk, FB Vonta Leach, WR Anquan Boldin, S Bernard Pollard, and CB Corey Graham. Throw in 3rd WR and kick return Jacoby Jones (who saved the Ravens in the Broncos game and returned the all-important 2nd half kickoff for a TD in the Super Bowl) and it is apparent the Ravens built their squad differently than TT has built the Pack.

As for the Niners, UFAs who started the Super Bowl included Randy Moss, C Jonathan Goodwin, DE Justin Smith, CB Carlos Rogers, and S Donta Whitner. The kicker Akers also arrived via free agency while the kick returner Ted Ginn came to SF through a trade. Again, I think it is pretty clear the 49ers have built their roster by acquiring more veterans who played for other teams than TT does.

With Saturday and Woodson gone and Benson only 50-50 to return, the Pack is done to just one player (Ryan Pickett) who has spent an appreciable amount of time with another team.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: ThatGuy284 on February 18, 2013, 01:54:23 PM
If only there was some way to prove that TT has been able to build a successful winner with his methodology...

Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Twain on February 18, 2013, 03:17:02 PM
If only there was some way to prove that TT has been able to build a successful winner with his methodology...

If only Green Bay had won the super bowl in the last decade like San Francisco.....  hysterical
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on February 18, 2013, 05:26:36 PM
confused(
Comparing TT to Wolf doesn't seem fair to me. 

Wolf was there at the start of the free agency phenomenon, an I believe was a classic "early adopter" of the change.  He figured it out and exploited it before others figured it out.

It is a different situation now.  In some ways, TT may have figured out the dangers of free agency better than others.  I understand that SF and Baltimore have had success with it, but the thing we aren't talking about is the number of losing teams that use free agency and still are losers.

Sure, I would like to see us score a home run on free agency.  I just think it is harder to do these days.

I'm with you.  Except for a couple of guys who will cost a fortune there is a reason why most FAs are available.   

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2013/1/29/3926974/super-bowl-2013-rosters (http://www.sbnation.com/nfl-mock-draft/2013/1/29/3926974/super-bowl-2013-rosters)


i'm not sure i understand the relevance of that link to your comment. the article that you linked to shows that the ravens have 14 players and the 49ers have 17 players who originally played for some other team. only four packers on the 2012 roster ever played a significant number of snaps for another team.

Unless I read that article wrong it appeared most of the players on these rosters were built along the same lines that TT advocates.   confused(


not trying to be rude, but yes - you did read the article wrong. to be fair, it is slightly misleading because they make it look like the ravens and the niners drafted all those guys. but if you read it closely, you will see that many of the guys who were "drafted" were actually drafted by other teams. aldenroche has already listed a whole bunch of starters and that were drafted, but not drafted by the teams they currently play for.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: cpk1994 on February 19, 2013, 07:51:43 AM
TT doesn't sign many name FAs but he isn't opposed to signing UDFAs.  We've found a couple of gems this way (Sheilds and Barclay e.g.).

TT has not signed any NAME free agents since 2006 (unless you count an obviously over-the-hill Saturday or past his prime Benson, both of who had NAMES but came on the cheap). TT also has not traded for a single NFL veteran player since 2007 (when he got Ryan Grant for a 7th round pick).

The record reveals TT has an aversion to adding NFL VETERAN talent to the team.

I certainly agree that he does, however, seem to relish signing undrafted/street free agents like Shields, T. Williams, D. Harris, D. Barclay and E. Walden.
The record also shows he had the highest offer on the table for Lavar Arrington and Adam Vinitieri, but they took money elsewhere. 

Also, not trading for players isn't a big deal because it is a rarity in the league as a whole. Ron Wolf didn't trade that often either.

Did Ron Wolf trade for Brett Favre? Did he trade for Keith Jackson? How about Eugene Robinson?

How was the guy who caught two TDs for the Ravens Anquan Boldin acquired? Couldn't have been via trade could it?
So, Wolf made 3 trades in his 9 seasons as GB GM. yep, he was a real trade machine.

Read my post again. I never said that trades didn't happen. I said they were rare and that Wolf didn't trade that often. And that is still fact.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on February 19, 2013, 08:18:55 AM
TT doesn't sign many name FAs but he isn't opposed to signing UDFAs.  We've found a couple of gems this way (Sheilds and Barclay e.g.).

TT has not signed any NAME free agents since 2006 (unless you count an obviously over-the-hill Saturday or past his prime Benson, both of who had NAMES but came on the cheap). TT also has not traded for a single NFL veteran player since 2007 (when he got Ryan Grant for a 7th round pick).

The record reveals TT has an aversion to adding NFL VETERAN talent to the team.

I certainly agree that he does, however, seem to relish signing undrafted/street free agents like Shields, T. Williams, D. Harris, D. Barclay and E. Walden.
The record also shows he had the highest offer on the table for Lavar Arrington and Adam Vinitieri, but they took money elsewhere. 

Also, not trading for players isn't a big deal because it is a rarity in the league as a whole. Ron Wolf didn't trade that often either.

Did Ron Wolf trade for Brett Favre? Did he trade for Keith Jackson? How about Eugene Robinson?

How was the guy who caught two TDs for the Ravens Anquan Boldin acquired? Couldn't have been via trade could it?
So, Wolf made 3 trades in his 9 seasons as GB GM. yep, he was a real trade machine.

Read my post again. I never said that trades didn't happen. I said they were rare and that Wolf didn't trade that often. And that is still fact.

I agree that trades are rare in the NFL.

But I thought you wrote "not trading for players isn't a big deal." That is why, in comparing TT to RW, I merely pointed out that RW's trades (especially the one for Favre) were pretty big factors in the Pack's success under RW.

I also think the Ravens trade for Anquan Boldin proved to be a big deal in their winning this year's Super Bowl. I further think the Falcons trades for Asante' Samuel and Tony Gonzalez and the Seahawks trade for Marshawn Lynch were big deals for those playoff teams.

Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: cpk1994 on February 20, 2013, 06:40:58 AM
TT doesn't sign many name FAs but he isn't opposed to signing UDFAs.  We've found a couple of gems this way (Sheilds and Barclay e.g.).

TT has not signed any NAME free agents since 2006 (unless you count an obviously over-the-hill Saturday or past his prime Benson, both of who had NAMES but came on the cheap). TT also has not traded for a single NFL veteran player since 2007 (when he got Ryan Grant for a 7th round pick).

The record reveals TT has an aversion to adding NFL VETERAN talent to the team.

I certainly agree that he does, however, seem to relish signing undrafted/street free agents like Shields, T. Williams, D. Harris, D. Barclay and E. Walden.
The record also shows he had the highest offer on the table for Lavar Arrington and Adam Vinitieri, but they took money elsewhere. 

Also, not trading for players isn't a big deal because it is a rarity in the league as a whole. Ron Wolf didn't trade that often either.

Did Ron Wolf trade for Brett Favre? Did he trade for Keith Jackson? How about Eugene Robinson?

How was the guy who caught two TDs for the Ravens Anquan Boldin acquired? Couldn't have been via trade could it?
So, Wolf made 3 trades in his 9 seasons as GB GM. yep, he was a real trade machine.

Read my post again. I never said that trades didn't happen. I said they were rare and that Wolf didn't trade that often. And that is still fact.

I agree that trades are rare in the NFL.

But I thought you wrote "not trading for players isn't a big deal." That is why, in comparing TT to RW, I merely pointed out that RW's trades (especially the one for Favre) were pretty big factors in the Pack's success under RW.

I also think the Ravens trade for Anquan Boldin proved to be a big deal in their winning this year's Super Bowl. I further think the Falcons trades for Asante' Samuel and Tony Gonzalez and the Seahawks trade for Marshawn Lynch were big deals for those playoff teams.
I said that trades weren't a big deal because they are rare. The Seahwaks and Falcons have done nothing despite those trades while GB has won a SB. The Ravens also won the Super Bowl, but Flacco was the big reason they won, not Boldin.  Boldin had 6 catches and 1 TD. Most receivers could accomplish that.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on February 20, 2013, 07:23:48 AM
So it is not the undisputed fact that Seattle and Atlanta made trades for Lynch, Gonzalez, and Samuel, respectively that is at issue any longer, it is that, in your mind, those trades are irrelevant because the Seahawks and Falcons "have done nothing." So I guess then trades only matter if they are made by teams that win Super Bowls and "do something."

Well, then again, in your mind the Ravens' trade for Anquan Boldin does not count as significant because his starter status and 6 catches for 106 yards and a TD in the Super Bowl win over the 49ers could be accomplished by "most receivers."

Hmm, I guess in your world a trade would only count if it involved the MVP of a Super Bowl winning team. Thanks, I now understand your position much, much better and completely agree with you that such trades have almost never happened.

Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Twain on February 20, 2013, 11:31:20 AM
Where is the analysis of free agents and trades the Kansas City Chiefs made, or the Oakland Raiders?  Your sort of cherry picking the teams you are using to say free agency and trades make the team so much better.

Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on February 20, 2013, 11:48:52 AM
Where is the analysis of free agents and trades the Kansas City Chiefs made, or the Oakland Raiders?  Your sort of cherry picking the teams you are using to say free agency and trades make the team so much better.

Actually, I'm not cherry picking. I believe the Packers have the best QB in the game and should contend for the Super Bowl as a result. Hence, I am comparing the make up of the Packers's roster to the rosters of other current/recent Super Bowl contenders (and winners) like the Ravens, 49ers, Patriots, Giants, Falcons, and Saints. 

I'm sure you are correct and some of the terrible teams in the league have been big players in free agency and on the trade front (though I am having a hard time remembering all the FAs the Chiefs have signed -- seems to me a lot of their high draft picks have just not panned out, just like Detroit). However, I am also sure some of the lower-level teams have not partaken much in free agency and they may not have even made a single trade in the past 10 years. Those teams are not my focus the teams that are threats to win the Super Bowl are.

Anyway if others want to comfort themselves by thinking that seriously taking part in UFA or making trades only leads to records like those of the Chiefs and Raiders (and ignore that Balt., SF, NYG, NE, and other contenders are more apt to acquire veteran talent than GB is) that is their prerogative.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Twain on February 20, 2013, 12:47:17 PM
Where is the analysis of free agents and trades the Kansas City Chiefs made, or the Oakland Raiders?  Your sort of cherry picking the teams you are using to say free agency and trades make the team so much better.

Actually, I'm not cherry picking. I believe the Packers have the best QB in the game and should contend for the Super Bowl as a result. Hence, I am comparing the make up of the Packers's roster to the rosters of other current/recent Super Bowl contenders (and winners) like the Ravens, 49ers, Patriots, Giants, Falcons, and Saints. 

I'm sure you are correct and some of the terrible teams in the league have been big players in free agency and on the trade front (though I am having a hard time remembering all the FAs the Chiefs have signed -- seems to me a lot of their high draft picks have just not panned out, just like Detroit). However, I am also sure some of the lower-level teams have not partaken much in free agency and they may not have even made a single trade in the past 10 years. Those teams are not my focus the teams that are threats to win the Super Bowl are.

Anyway if others want to comfort themselves by thinking that seriously taking part in UFA or making trades only leads to records like those of the Chiefs and Raiders (and ignore that Balt., SF, NYG, NE, and other contenders are more apt to acquire veteran talent than GB is) that is their prerogative.

But that is not what I am saying.  I'm just pointing out that the evidence that signing free agents and making trades leads to Super Bowl contention has not been convincing.  After all, we have been a Super Bowl contender for three years, and unlike some on your list, we have actually won one recently.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on February 20, 2013, 01:11:16 PM
Where is the analysis of free agents and trades the Kansas City Chiefs made, or the Oakland Raiders?  Your sort of cherry picking the teams you are using to say free agency and trades make the team so much better.

Actually, I'm not cherry picking. I believe the Packers have the best QB in the game and should contend for the Super Bowl as a result. Hence, I am comparing the make up of the Packers's roster to the rosters of other current/recent Super Bowl contenders (and winners) like the Ravens, 49ers, Patriots, Giants, Falcons, and Saints. 

I'm sure you are correct and some of the terrible teams in the league have been big players in free agency and on the trade front (though I am having a hard time remembering all the FAs the Chiefs have signed -- seems to me a lot of their high draft picks have just not panned out, just like Detroit). However, I am also sure some of the lower-level teams have not partaken much in free agency and they may not have even made a single trade in the past 10 years. Those teams are not my focus the teams that are threats to win the Super Bowl are.

Anyway if others want to comfort themselves by thinking that seriously taking part in UFA or making trades only leads to records like those of the Chiefs and Raiders (and ignore that Balt., SF, NYG, NE, and other contenders are more apt to acquire veteran talent than GB is) that is their prerogative.

But that is not what I am saying.  I'm just pointing out that the evidence that signing free agents and making trades leads to Super Bowl contention has not been convincing.  After all, we have been a Super Bowl contender for three years, and unlike some on your list, we have actually won one recently.

Fair points that GB has been a contender the last 3 without making trades or signing many UFAs (though I don't think they win the Super Bowl without signing free agents Pickett and Woodson in 2006).

My posts, on at thread about TT not signing free agents, is actually the opposite of the one you make above -- namely that acquiring veteran talent through free agency and/or trades does not preclude teams from winning the Super Bowl as the Ravens and Giants have proven the past 2 seasons. IMO too many Packer fans have a myopic view that taking part in free agency necessarily leads to negative outcomes. The evidence is to the contrary.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: JimATX on February 20, 2013, 09:09:42 PM
Currently the Packers have 68 players on the "roster". 35 were drafted and 31 were FAs. Did those 31 FAs join the Packers without a contract?
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: cpk1994 on February 21, 2013, 12:39:29 AM
So it is not the undisputed fact that Seattle and Atlanta made trades for Lynch, Gonzalez, and Samuel, respectively that is at issue any longer, it is that, in your mind, those trades are irrelevant because the Seahawks and Falcons "have done nothing." So I guess then trades only matter if they are made by teams that win Super Bowls and "do something."

Well, then again, in your mind the Ravens' trade for Anquan Boldin does not count as significant because his starter status and 6 catches for 106 yards and a TD in the Super Bowl win over the 49ers could be accomplished by "most receivers."

Hmm, I guess in your world a trade would only count if it involved the MVP of a Super Bowl winning team. Thanks, I now understand your position much, much better and completely agree with you that such trades have almost never happened.
You are the one making a claim that making trades are very important towards winning SB's. I am simply pointing out that the trades for Gonzalez and Lynch haven't yielded anything while TT's way has already yielded a Super Bowl. GB has been just as successful as those teams you pointed out, so why are trades so important?
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on February 21, 2013, 05:29:25 AM
Currently the Packers have 68 players on the "roster". 35 were drafted and 31 were FAs. Did those 31 FAs join the Packers without a contract?


and now we've come back to the tired old argument made by people who don't know the difference between an unrestricted veteran free agent and an undrafted street free agent. signing players that no other nfl team wanted and who have never played a single down of nfl football in a regular season game is not what we are talking about here.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: cpk1994 on February 21, 2013, 07:33:02 AM
Currently the Packers have 68 players on the "roster". 35 were drafted and 31 were FAs. Did those 31 FAs join the Packers without a contract?


and now we've come back to the tired old argument made by people who don't know the difference between an unrestricted veteran free agent and an undrafted street free agent. signing players that no other nfl team wanted and who have never played a single down of nfl football in a regular season game is not what we are talking about here.
Of course, because you can't make your argument that "TT doesn't sign FA" stick unless you claim those don't count regardless of the fact that they are indeed FA. 
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: AldenRoche on February 21, 2013, 07:48:39 AM
Currently the Packers have 68 players on the "roster". 35 were drafted and 31 were FAs. Did those 31 FAs join the Packers without a contract?

This thread concerns veteran unrestricted free agents (UFAs like Woodson and Pickett) not street and undrafted free agents (UDFAs). You know, guys like Kuhn, DuJuan Harris, and Frank Zombo. Every NFL team has numerous street and UDFAs on their roster now that the draft has only 7 rounds.

Heck, I think TT and his staff have done an outstanding job at finding street and UDFAs but that simply is not the same discussion as veteran, UFAs.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on February 21, 2013, 08:05:17 AM
Currently the Packers have 68 players on the "roster". 35 were drafted and 31 were FAs. Did those 31 FAs join the Packers without a contract?


and now we've come back to the tired old argument made by people who don't know the difference between an unrestricted veteran free agent and an undrafted street free agent. signing players that no other nfl team wanted and who have never played a single down of nfl football in a regular season game is not what we are talking about here.
Of course, because you can't make your argument that "TT doesn't sign FA" stick unless you claim those don't count regardless of the fact that they are indeed FA.


nobody ever made the claim that tt doesn't sign street free agents. and i really hate the fact that the same term is used to describe nfl veterans who have proven themselves worthy of playing at the nfl level and a bunch of guys with zero experience who have been passed over by every team in the league. some of us are capable of distinguishing between the two. others can't see the difference.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: eX Oh on February 21, 2013, 08:20:47 AM
There's always going to be a handful of trades/FA signings that work out well.

These are the vast minority.

The only way to really pursue these deals is on a case-by-case basis with 14 metric crap-tons of due dilligence.  Pretty hard to generalize about it - but teams that over-pursue generally suffer in the end.  Going to this well too often fragments your team, locker room, and your salary cap.

I imagine TT could be a little more aggressive - but too much more and we may not have had the solid team we have enjoyed.

Its really a dogfight each year trying to get some value out of FA/Trades and its not as simple as saying 'I'm gonna sign a good WR/OLB/Whatever'.  There are a couple right ways and a thousand wrong ways to go about this IMO.  And there are zero guarantees you'll be able to find your guy and not hamstring yourself in the process (The Bears and Cutler).

Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Beagle on February 21, 2013, 08:51:03 AM
You are the one making a claim that making trades are very important towards winning SB's. I am simply pointing out that the trades for Gonzalez and Lynch haven't yielded anything while TT's way has already yielded a Super Bowl. GB has been just as successful as those teams you pointed out, so why are trades so important?

I would think that if you went to to the GM's of both Atlanta and Seattle and tried to argue that " the trades for Gonzalez and Lynch haven't yielded anything", they would laugh you right out of the building. Both of those teams could have very easily been in the SB this past year and those players you mentioned had a lot to do with their success.

I simply don't see the relevance in your aguements. Trading can have a major positive effect on a team and just because TT does not trade as much as other teams, does not mean that it does not make a major impact.

You can attribute the success of the Green Bay Packers over the course of the last 20 years or so to the fact that we had some very good GM's. Their success for the franchise had a lot to do with FA signings, drafting and trades. I don't buy onto the arguement that Ron Wolf's accomplishments are somehow minimized because he came in at the beginning of the FA era. He built some pretty good Packer teams and as I recall, all the other teams in the NFL had access to all the same players Ron Wolf did. He just made some gret trades....as well as draft picks and FA signings.

But it makes me wonder.... how much better would we be now if Ted had signed a great FA (Randy Moss in 2007, held on to Cullen Jenkins in 2011) or made a great trade. Food for thought and it can be argued to death for both good and bad to the success of the team. 

But we are already are an elite team and it is because of Ted and his methodology. But that does not mean he can't do some things better. But to simply say that trades don't impact teams or that we are simply better because we won 1 SB a few years ago so the mindset on other teams must be wrong is , IMO, not accurate.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: Twain on February 21, 2013, 03:22:00 PM
I think that is an excellent post Beagle.

I just want to add that I think many fans fail to recognize how hard it is to be successful in the free agent scrum.  The recent article on the Reggie White deal really points that out, when they talk about how the Packers' ability to structure the deal the way they did due to a large amount of cash on hand allowed them to beat out teams like SanFrancisco that had limitations on what they could spend or how they could structure.

The cap implications of a big name free agent can sink a team if they fail to perform.  Mike Sherman learned a bit about that.

Teams can definitely be made better with key free agents or trades, but making those deals is not without risk.  It would be nice to hit the jackpot on a trade or free agent, but we are doing okay despite the failures in this area.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: cpk1994 on February 22, 2013, 12:32:56 AM
Currently the Packers have 68 players on the "roster". 35 were drafted and 31 were FAs. Did those 31 FAs join the Packers without a contract?


and now we've come back to the tired old argument made by people who don't know the difference between an unrestricted veteran free agent and an undrafted street free agent. signing players that no other nfl team wanted and who have never played a single down of nfl football in a regular season game is not what we are talking about here.
Of course, because you can't make your argument that "TT doesn't sign FA" stick unless you claim those don't count regardless of the fact that they are indeed FA.


nobody ever made the claim that tt doesn't sign street free agents. and i really hate the fact that the same term is used to describe nfl veterans who have proven themselves worthy of playing at the nfl level and a bunch of guys with zero experience who have been passed over by every team in the league. some of us are capable of distinguishing between the two. others can't see the difference.
Thanksfor proving my point. You  know can't make your "TT doesn't sign FA"  so you arbitrarily decide on your own who is a FA or not so it makes your argument stick. FA are any player who isn't currently under contract. Period. That is how the NFL defines it. FA are not whoever you feel will make your argument. "TT doesn't sign players I think are FA" is not an argument.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: cpk1994 on February 22, 2013, 12:37:17 AM
You are the one making a claim that making trades are very important towards winning SB's. I am simply pointing out that the trades for Gonzalez and Lynch haven't yielded anything while TT's way has already yielded a Super Bowl. GB has been just as successful as those teams you pointed out, so why are trades so important?

I would think that if you went to to the GM's of both Atlanta and Seattle and tried to argue that " the trades for Gonzalez and Lynch haven't yielded anything", they would laugh you right out of the building. Both of those teams could have very easily been in the SB this past year and those players you mentioned had a lot to do with their success.

Well guess what? THEY WEREN'T. You can talk about your coulda, woulda, shoulda's. At the end of the day the Falcons and Seahwaks still lhaven't sniffed a SB. Seattle still hasn't sniffed an NFC ttyitlr game yet despite the trade. Meanwhile, GB and TT have already won a SB with their method and are in position every year to win another. It's laughable to say TT should be making trades  when TT has already proven his method works.
Title: Re: TT doesn't sign free agents
Post by: realitybytes on February 22, 2013, 07:06:32 AM
Currently the Packers have 68 players on the "roster". 35 were drafted and 31 were FAs. Did those 31 FAs join the Packers without a contract?


and now we've come back to the tired old argument made by people who don't know the difference between an unrestricted veteran free agent and an undrafted street free agent. signing players that no other nfl team wanted and who have never played a single down of nfl football in a regular season game is not what we are talking about here.
Of course, because you can't make your argument that "TT doesn't sign FA" stick unless you claim those don't count regardless of the fact that they are indeed FA.


nobody ever made the claim that tt doesn't sign street free agents. and i really hate the fact that the same term is used to describe nfl veterans who have proven themselves worthy of playing at the nfl level and a bunch of guys with zero experience who have been passed over by every team in the league. some of us are capable of distinguishing between the two. others can't see the difference.
Thanksfor proving my point. You  know can't make your "TT doesn't sign FA"  so you arbitrarily decide on your own who is a FA or not so it makes your argument stick. FA are any player who isn't currently under contract. Period. That is how the NFL defines it. FA are not whoever you feel will make your argument. "TT doesn't sign players I think are FA" is not an argument.


there is a reason why most intelligent posters have left this forum.