April 18, 2019, 05:31:20 PM

Author Topic: Hypothetical GM  (Read 1661 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4978
  • Karma: +34/-2
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2019, 09:38:37 AM »
Using these same scenario of the first 11 players drafted, but the Packers have no trade back options. Who are you selecting at 12 for The Green Bay Packers?

The GM said he would take OT Jonah Williams if he picked at 12 and claymaker stated he would stay at 12 and take OT Andre Dillard. Interesting that the first two guesses are OT's.

Dexter Lawrence.

You can't double team all of Lawrence, Clark, and Smith. And Lawrence is the 2020 replacement for Daniels.

Offline footballdad

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +15/-0
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2019, 11:14:09 AM »
DB.................you beat me to it! I was going to start a thread about drafting Dexter Lawrence @ 12 and Jerry Tillery @ 30. Along with Kenny Clark, the front 5 would be set for years. Tillery would replace Wilkerson. Daniels and Lowry soon to be free agents.

Offline ThatGuy284

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 886
  • Karma: +2/-4
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2019, 02:21:14 PM »
If looking at the DL -Wilkins is the better player than Lawrence.  I’ve seen almost every Clemson game for the last few seasons, some in person. He can play all over the line all 3 downs whether in even or odd fronts.  By all accounts he loves football, is a great kid and smart (and no PED suspensions).  Lawrence didn’t play in the playoffs and Wilkins, Ferrell dominated w|o him.  Lawrence is a good player but so much more limited than Wilkins.  If we don’t draft Hockenson at 12 then Wilkins is top of my list. 

Edit:  sorry I didn’t post a random conspiracy theory in this post -  not sure if that was the dual purpose of this thread.  Rest assured I’m wearing a tinfoil cap and waiting to be abducted by aliens as I post this
« Last Edit: March 24, 2019, 02:23:20 PM by ThatGuy284 »

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4978
  • Karma: +34/-2
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #18 on: March 24, 2019, 02:52:36 PM »
If looking at the DL -Wilkins is the better player than Lawrence.  I’ve seen almost every Clemson game for the last few seasons, some in person. He can play all over the line all 3 downs whether in even or odd fronts.  By all accounts he loves football, is a great kid and smart (and no PED suspensions).  Lawrence didn’t play in the playoffs and Wilkins, Ferrell dominated w|o him.  Lawrence is a good player but so much more limited than Wilkins.  If we don’t draft Hockenson at 12 then Wilkins is top of my list. 

Edit:  sorry I didn’t post a random conspiracy theory in this post -  not sure if that was the dual purpose of this thread.  Rest assured I’m wearing a tinfoil cap and waiting to be abducted by aliens as I post this

Right there with ya!


Online The GM

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2635
  • Karma: +44/-4
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #19 on: March 24, 2019, 03:59:10 PM »
Clemson has a great DLine but my question is how much did each guy  benefit from having the other top prospects on that line with them?  Which one translates best to the NFL?

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4978
  • Karma: +34/-2
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #20 on: March 24, 2019, 05:13:51 PM »
I'd have no problem with Wilkins either.

High character

REALLY smart...............graduated in 2.5 yrs

Loves football = motivated.

Offline PackerJoe

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
  • Karma: +12/-15
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #21 on: March 25, 2019, 08:04:56 AM »
I'd be giving the Giants, Miami and Washington a call and say we will trade back if the offer is right.  The giants may want to trade the farm away since Ohio State QB is still available.  I would take next year's one, this years 2 and a 4!  Miami or Washington, I want a 3rd rd pick.

If that doesn't work, I'm drafting Ferrell from Clemson or Cody Ford from OK.  Remember, protect the  QB and new focus on running.  Ford is a road grading beast.  Ferrell personally destroyed Alabama's OL in the title game. 

I'll even throw in our backup qb for free. 


Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2978
  • Karma: +44/-15
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #22 on: March 25, 2019, 11:38:55 AM »
I'd be giving the Giants, Miami and Washington a call and say we will trade back if the offer is right.  The giants may want to trade the farm away since Ohio State QB is still available.  I would take next year's one, this years 2 and a 4!  Miami or Washington, I want a 3rd rd pick.

If that doesn't work, I'm drafting Ferrell from Clemson or Cody Ford from OK.  Remember, protect the  QB and new focus on running.  Ford is a road grading beast.  Ferrell personally destroyed Alabama's OL in the title game. 

I'll even throw in our backup qb for free.

I don't know, just asking for a friend. Why would the Giants 'trade the farm' to move up when they could just draft the Ohio State QB at 6?

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2978
  • Karma: +44/-15
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #23 on: March 25, 2019, 11:56:55 AM »
If looking at the DL -Wilkins is the better player than Lawrence.  I’ve seen almost every Clemson game for the last few seasons, some in person. He can play all over the line all 3 downs whether in even or odd fronts.  By all accounts he loves football, is a great kid and smart (and no PED suspensions).  Lawrence didn’t play in the playoffs and Wilkins, Ferrell dominated w|o him.  Lawrence is a good player but so much more limited than Wilkins.  If we don’t draft Hockenson at 12 then Wilkins is top of my list. 

Edit:  sorry I didn’t post a random conspiracy theory in this post -  not sure if that was the dual purpose of this thread.  Rest assured I’m wearing a tinfoil cap and waiting to be abducted by aliens as I post this

Right there with ya!



We have a billion dollar public company change it managing structure with every decision to be run by the president first. I suggest that a 'profit first' business method of operations has replaced football people making football decisions with football being the number one focus and you claim it is tinfoil cap territory. OK. Has a billion dollar corporation ever implemented a profit first strategy? Well, only about everyone of them.     

Online claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3000
  • Karma: +14/-1
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #24 on: March 25, 2019, 02:54:14 PM »
I've seen some mock drafts where they suggest GB could take Greedy Williams. I tend to think they still like Kevin King, but Greedy Williams wouldn't be the worst idea. They are still one injury away from having issues at CB, and that seems pretty likely imo. I'm not really certain Williams is the CB I would take, but CB is still a position of need for them despite the investment they've put into it. Definitely a position I think they could target early and surprise some people.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2019, 02:57:14 PM by claymaker »

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2978
  • Karma: +44/-15
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #25 on: March 25, 2019, 03:06:20 PM »
I've seen some mock drafts where they suggest GB could take Greedy Williams. I tend to think they still like Kevin King, but Greedy Williams wouldn't be the worst idea. They are still one injury away from having issues at CB, and that seems pretty likely imo. I'm not really certain Williams is the CB I would take, but CB is still a position of need for them despite the investment they've put into it. Definitely a position I think they could target early and surprise some people.

I am very much in agreement that CB is a position that will be addressed. Not sure Williams at 12 is the right person and place, but certainly don't think it is out of the question.

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5820
  • Karma: +42/-16
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #26 on: March 25, 2019, 04:38:56 PM »
We have a billion dollar public company change it managing structure with every decision to be run by the president first. I suggest that a 'profit first' business method of operations has replaced football people making football decisions with football being the number one focus and you claim it is tinfoil cap territory. OK. Has a billion dollar corporation ever implemented a profit first strategy? Well, only about everyone of them.   

First, the Packers are indeed "publically owned", but only because people are willing to pay hard earned money for a piece of paper to hang on their wall. Yes, there are shareholders meetings, but does anyone really think the "owners" have any real influence on the team? There are over 100,000 people on the season ticket waiting list. So, is the team trying to increase revenue? Of course. At the cost of putting a substandard team on the field? Prove it. They have expanded the stadium, and are expanding the "Lambeau experience" in an attempt to get as many people as possible to part with as many dollars as possible. However, this individual business is linked to a larger entity, has restrictions on the amount of money they can spend or save in any particular year, and have other limits on how much control they have over the team.

In brief, I am deeply skeptical that Murphy is more interested in making money than putting a competitive team on the field. If you have some evidence that proves this allegation, please present it for our consideration.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2978
  • Karma: +44/-15
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #27 on: March 25, 2019, 08:37:07 PM »
We have a billion dollar public company change it managing structure with every decision to be run by the president first. I suggest that a 'profit first' business method of operations has replaced football people making football decisions with football being the number one focus and you claim it is tinfoil cap territory. OK. Has a billion dollar corporation ever implemented a profit first strategy? Well, only about everyone of them.   

First, the Packers are indeed "publically owned", but only because people are willing to pay hard earned money for a piece of paper to hang on their wall. Yes, there are shareholders meetings, but does anyone really think the "owners" have any real influence on the team? There are over 100,000 people on the season ticket waiting list. So, is the team trying to increase revenue? Of course. At the cost of putting a substandard team on the field? Prove it. They have expanded the stadium, and are expanding the "Lambeau experience" in an attempt to get as many people as possible to part with as many dollars as possible. However, this individual business is linked to a larger entity, has restrictions on the amount of money they can spend or save in any particular year, and have other limits on how much control they have over the team.

In brief, I am deeply skeptical that Murphy is more interested in making money than putting a competitive team on the field. If you have some evidence that proves this allegation, please present it for our consideration.

I'm not on trial here, if you choose to believe that they are only in it to win, well go ahead and believe it. The Packers are counting on it.

Your comments suggest that you do not understand what 'profit first ' really means. It's about maximizing profits 365 days out of the year. The stadium and ticket sales matured and topped out long ago. The Packers are now simply using the old business adage of 'sell them what they want'. Fan base wants hope, the Packers sell them some hope. Do the Packers want to win? Of course they want to win, it will just need to overcome some of the decisions made to maximize the daily profits along the way is all. The things that won't happen are the tough decisions that would be unpopular with the majority of the fan base, like when Rodgers was drafted. Unpopular decisions make for unhappy fans and unhappy fans don't open their wallets. Larger decisions are now made bases on popular opinion, not from the opinions of the football people.

Can the Packers still win? Sure, but it will be in spite of the profit first structure, not because of it.     

Online The GM

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2635
  • Karma: +44/-4
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #28 on: March 26, 2019, 07:13:44 AM »
I've seen some mock drafts where they suggest GB could take Greedy Williams. I tend to think they still like Kevin King, but Greedy Williams wouldn't be the worst idea. They are still one injury away from having issues at CB, and that seems pretty likely imo. I'm not really certain Williams is the CB I would take, but CB is still a position of need for them despite the investment they've put into it. Definitely a position I think they could target early and surprise some people.

As you mentioned, I think it depends on what they think of King.  Byron Murphy is also a good corner who they could consider. I wouldnt take him at 12 but you MIGHT be able to trade down a few slots and get either Murphy or Williams.  IMO, I think they roll with King, grab a CB later in the draft, and see what happens.  The jury is still out on King, and this season will be telling for him. JMO.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2019, 07:17:08 AM by The GM »

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2978
  • Karma: +44/-15
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #29 on: March 26, 2019, 07:20:31 AM »
I've seen some mock drafts where they suggest GB could take Greedy Williams. I tend to think they still like Kevin King, but Greedy Williams wouldn't be the worst idea. They are still one injury away from having issues at CB, and that seems pretty likely imo. I'm not really certain Williams is the CB I would take, but CB is still a position of need for them despite the investment they've put into it. Definitely a position I think they could target early and surprise some people.

As you mentioned, I think it depends on what they think of King.  Byron Murphy is also a good corner who they could consider. I wouldnt take him at 12 but you might be able to trade down a few slots and get either Murphy or Williams.  IMO, I think they roll with King, grab a CB later in the draft, and see what happens.  The jury is still out on King, and this season will be telling for him. JMO.

I think you are spot on with that GM. It is interesting to see the wide range of grades on all this years CB's, even Williams who some have as a top 10 pick and others have him between 25-40 on their big boards. I have struggled to get a good feel for this group and I don't think I'm alone.

 
Ben Fennell


 
@BenFennell_NFL
Follow
Follow @BenFennell_NFL
 
More
CB class is murky & all over the place