Jersey Al's Green Bay Packers NFL Dra...

Jersey Al's Green Bay Packers NFL Draft 2010 Analysis No. 1: Trade Down

There are 14 comments on the Bleacher Report story from Feb 15, 2010, titled Jersey Al's Green Bay Packers NFL Draft 2010 Analysis No. 1: Trade Down. In it, Bleacher Report reports that:

This will be the first in a series of reports where I will be analyzing the upcoming 2010 NFL Draft from a Green Bay Packers perspective.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Bleacher Report.

GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#1 Feb 16, 2010
Trade down philosophies are invariably due to a belief that a team has more needs than will be filled. Unfortunately, with Ted Thompson as GM that is true. Imagine the possibilties if the Packers hire a better GM.
eric

Denmark, WI

#2 Feb 16, 2010
Just imagine the fact TT might have seen the player he wants to draft already drafted,so TT trades a pick for another and an extra so as not to waste the pick on someone we dont need,its called not letting an ego get in the way, or doing what is best for the team.
May i also remind you the fact,Ted traded our 2nd and the Favre pick from NY and traded UP and drafted Clay Mathews Jr. and that worked out exceptionally well for the Packers.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#3 Feb 16, 2010
I hope the Packers GM would always make the perfect decisions that are in the Packers best interest. My original comment addressed the point made by the author of this topic, which was a belief that the Packers should trade down. That reflects a belief that the Packers are still engaged in rebuilding (after 5 years already) and the author said as much. I believe TT has turned rebuilding into a perpetual condition for the Packers. It's time to hire a better GM. In fact, we're past the time to hire a better GM. It should have been done at the end of last season. Imagine the possibilities.
wal0645

Yorktown, VA

#4 Feb 16, 2010
I believe the team is now stocked with enough quality players that TT doesn't have to be so tied to the draft system where "picks-a-plenty" was the norm. Last year he traded up and got Matthews who was worth the move in gold. We still got a few holes and most know what they are, but it's not like 3-4 years ago. So I believe TT will keep that #1 seeing as how we need a quality OT,safety,CB,OLB. Even at our position in the draft we can find quality there for one of these spots.
answerman

Wausau, WI

#5 Feb 16, 2010
(dusting off the crystal ball) "And with the 23rd pick in the 2010 NFL draft..."

Not sure who will be picked, but I seriously doubt it will be the Packers picking at #23. This draft seems to really level off after the first 12-15 players... once the middle of the first round is reached, I don't know that there is that much difference quality-level wise between the 16th pick and the 46th pick.

So, my guess... unless the Packers see someone they really can't live without and trade up into the top 10 (possible but doubtful), I think they'll trade down. In neither case are they picking at #23.

Of course, what do I know...
eric

Denmark, WI

#6 Feb 16, 2010
Its just a matter of what guy he likes and if he feels is worthy of a 1st round pick or could be had in the 2nd round.
If he has 2 guys in mind,and both are gone,i have no problem with Ted trading the pick for an upper 2nd and a mid round pick.It doesn't mean TT thinks we need to rebuild ect like some would love to make us beleive,its just he didn't like what was left so he traded out.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#7 Feb 16, 2010
Funny how you felt differently last year when Ted traded up eric. I recall you attaching significance to moving up. You were saying how it meant that the Packers were done rebuilding and that Ted must feel the Packers only had a few holes to fill. Why would trading down have no meaning?
eric

Denmark, WI

#8 Feb 16, 2010
GBP,,you are a GM,you like 3 guys and you have pick #23....
1st guy you like goes at 15
2nd goes at 20
3rd goes at 21

Do you use your 23 on someone else? or do you trade the pick for a 29th and maybe a 4th round.so you can draft someone who you feel is late 1st or even reach for a guy you think will go at 35 ( 3rd pick 2nd round) and grab him at the end of the 1st round.
if i was GM,I wouldnt use my 23 pick for a guy i didnt like if the 3 guys i liked were gone already,id trade down adn maybe take a late first rounder at 30 or trade for an upper 2nd round pick and a 4th or whatever.Its got nothing to do with rebuilding, hell if I were GM id maybe try to trade 23 and throw in another pick next year and trade into the top 5 for a LT if there is a guy up there worth drafting.If you have 1 guy targeted like Clay Mathews last year,trade up,,if you or TT in this case trades out of 23 for a later pick adn another pick later on in the middle of the draft,it doesn't mean hes rebuilding,would you trade your 23 for a 30 straight up? NO you would get a 2nd pick to even it out.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#9 Feb 17, 2010
I would do whatever I thought was best for the team. However, this isn't about me.

I didn't write this Topix article. I'm not advocating that the Packers should trade down. I didn't attach any significance to trading up last year. You did! Apparently the author of this article and you believe such moves indicate whether a team is rebuilding. What I don't understand is why you would believe moving up last year was significant but moving down this year wouldn't be significant. But go ahead and dodge the question. I notice you do that when caught in your many inconsistencies.
eric

Denmark, WI

#10 Feb 17, 2010
I didn't dodge anything,stop over reacting for christ sake!
again, moving down doesn't mean we are rebuilding,it prob means TT didn't like the available picks for the spot assuming he trades down this year.
The article was the opinion of its author so i know your not advocating anything,but, I brought up a situation and you gave a vanilla answer,you would do whats best for the team,which is right,but,everyone on here would do that as well.
Moving up last year was TED going for one player and trying to fill a particular spot and fill a particular hole for years to come,which he did.
so again read #8 and maybe you will get the point.As for dodging the question,as you have been bitching about firing TT and all has been asked to you by many is name a replacement if you want him fired and your answer is ask Eric,nice way to dodge the question there hah? Inconsistencies, i dont think so,but, again, nice to try to bash someone,when your basically clueless, i explained it to you,its not my problem is you are or have an inability to comprehend basic logic
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#11 Feb 17, 2010
First, I didn't write the article. Read it. I merely commented on what the author said.

Second, if you want names to replace Ted, look them up yourself. You can start with the management personnel for the 25% of teams that remained in the playoffs after the Packers were eliminated. You can add the Giants and Steelers. Their management teams have done alright. That should give you plenty to start. Remember that the Packers don't have a history of hiring people that were GMs elsewhere. Ted Thompson, Mike Sherman and Ron Wolf became GMs for the first time with the Packers.

Personally, if I was Mark Murphy, I would begin the search with the many hundreds of management personnel throughout the league. I would include people previously in the league but currently without a job. That would have included, Mike Holmgren until recently, for example. Then I would talk to others (former and current coaches and GMs for example) about people they would recommend. I would also seek their advice about how to go about the hiring process. After, and only after, I would interview the most qualified available candidates. As some might be under contract, that would require obtaining permission from other teams. At the end of that process I would have a list of names of people I would want for the position. I assume Mr. Murphy would do at least as much as I would do. Feel free to come up with names yourself however you choose.

You and your buddies can waste your time speculating as to the names that Mark Murphy will come up with someday. I don't see the point. However, the need for a better GM is clear.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#12 Feb 17, 2010
eric wrote:
I didn't dodge anything,stop over reacting for christ sake!
again, moving down doesn't mean we are rebuilding,it prob means TT didn't like the available picks for the spot assuming he trades down this year.
The article was the opinion of its author so i know your not advocating anything,but, I brought up a situation and you gave a vanilla answer,you would do whats best for the team,which is right,but,everyone on here would do that as well.
Moving up last year was TED going for one player and trying to fill a particular spot and fill a particular hole for years to come,which he did.
so again read #8 and maybe you will get the point.As for dodging the question,as you have been bitching about firing TT and all has been asked to you by many is name a replacement if you want him fired and your answer is ask Eric,nice way to dodge the question there hah? Inconsistencies, i dont think so,but, again, nice to try to bash someone,when your basically clueless, i explained it to you,its not my problem is you are or have an inability to comprehend basic logic
BTW nice job dodging the question again. Please don't bother responding, I know you'll never provide an answer. I should not have asked. My bad.
eric

Denmark, WI

#13 Feb 17, 2010
Whatever, i have explained it so a 4 yr old can get it,which explains why it went right over your head.,I couldn't be more clear,so in typical GBP fashion,hear fact that you don't want to hear,and go off on a typical ridiculous gibberish .
The fact you feel you deserve an answer shows what an arrogant idiot you truly are, my only problem is actually trying to answer your question with plain English which obviously went straight over your head.Dont want to hear the answer,dont ask the question
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#14 Feb 17, 2010
eric wrote:
Whatever, i have explained it so a 4 yr old can get it,which explains why it went right over your head.,I couldn't be more clear,so in typical GBP fashion,hear fact that you don't want to hear,and go off on a typical ridiculous gibberish .
The fact you feel you deserve an answer shows what an arrogant idiot you truly are, my only problem is actually trying to answer your question with plain English which obviously went straight over your head.Dont want to hear the answer,dont ask the question
Go back and read the question if you want. As I said, I don't expect an answer and would prefer you not respond since you will never provide an answer. Again, my bad.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Clay Matthews Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Aaron Rodgers lauds Ha Ha Clinton-Dix for seeki... Nov 18 Laughing Bear Fan 5
News Randall Cobb, Clay Matthews questionable for Pa... Oct '16 Laughing Bear Fan 1
News Matthews, Peppers talk PEDs with NFL investigators Aug '16 y 2
News Packers' Matthews, Peppers face suspension Aug '16 Laughing Bear Fan 1
News Clay Matthews says NFL should 'go to college ru... (Jan '16) Jan '16 Fart news 3
News Green Bay Packers: Salary cap space will come i... (Feb '15) Feb '15 GBPmies 1
News Carroll sat Matthews at USC (Jan '15) Jan '15 Ouch Farts 4
More from around the web