RealGM

WeekapaugGroove wrote:Biggest complaints I see is a 5th rd QB and 6th round kicker and I just can't get worked up about that.

A very measured and reasonable take.

M-C-G wrote:

WeekapaugGroove wrote:Biggest complaints I see is a 5th rd QB and 6th round kicker and I just can't get worked up about that.

A very measured and reasonable take.

Agreed!

Especially since we traded down in the 3rd twice to get an extra 5th and 6th. If we basically targeted Reed in the 3rd round and traded down to collect those two picks so we could take fliers on a backup QB and K I am fine with that.

My biggest concerns were:

-Passing on Darnell Washington. But I can't be mad because we drafted two other TEs that might be equally as good or better than him

-Drafting Reed over Hyatt or Tillman, but that's just because I didn't know much about Reed and did not like his RAS score. Seems like when we go against this way of thinking it hurts us.

-Not drafting OL

-The before mentioned QB/K. I am not even mad at drafting a K in the 6th, it's one who missed 30% of their kicks. Maybe they feel they see something they can fix, no clue.



As usual, most picks I would've went a totally different way but that doesn't make me right or them wrong. I am cautiously optimistic and if this draft sucks and Jordan Love sucks (I wanted to draft Love, just saying if) I will be rooting for us to go 0-17 to get Caleb Williams.

Is Silverstein's pod worth listening to?

Mags FTW wrote:Is Silverstein's pod worth listening to?

Is any local media worth listening to?

(no)

Iheartfootball wrote:

stillgotgame wrote:B

I like the draft a lot. The only hang up I have is I thought a good GM always drafted the BPA. Gute clearly drafted for NEED.

I don’t think it’s quite so black and white. It’s the fine art of combining both.

It is. But when your decisions are clouded by a second variable - in this case need - it greatly reduces the chances of success.
As a comparison in my 25 years at my engineering firm I've seen many coincidences like this. A cheaper process or a more convenient method comes up and shortcuts are taken.
I have no idea how our draft will come out though. We'll see.

stillgotgame wrote:

Iheartfootball wrote:

stillgotgame wrote:B

I like the draft a lot. The only hang up I have is I thought a good GM always drafted the BPA. Gute clearly drafted for NEED.

I don’t think it’s quite so black and white. It’s the fine art of combining both.

It is. But when your decisions are clouded by a second variable - in this case need - it greatly reduces the chances of success.
As a comparison in my 25 years at my engineering firm I've seen many coincidences like this. A cheaper process or a more convenient method comes up and shortcuts are taken.
I have no idea how our draft will come out though. We'll see.

It really isn't black and white. You'll notice when I put out my top 102 board I had tiers of players. Those were all players I had graded roughly similar value, when the Packers are up its perfectly logical to select within that tier of players and go based on positional need. Now if you start reaching into a different tier to grab a player then it becomes an issue but without seeing the Packers board we have no idea if that's what they did.

ReasonablySober wrote:

paulpressey25 wrote:Don't understand the Kicker and QB picks. Both seem to have massive red flags.

There has to be some "we see something others don't" going on here.

To me this is a key as to whether Gutey is a long-term success or not. Does he mine great value out of something that isn't obvious to the rest of the league.

Kicker has a history with our ST coach. QB is one of the best athletes at his position. Easy to understand the picks with that context.

I only know 3 things about this QB based on reading this board.
1. He objectively sucks
2. He is one of the most athletic QBs.
3. He is the smartest QB in the draft (or whatever wording was in the quote).
Lol I don't understand anything about this pick

I liked our draft quite a bit. My only gripes were taking Clifford over Hall and I'm not the biggest Musgrave fan, but after the Lions stole LaPorta and Mayer was already gone, it was fine. Love the Tucker Kraft pick and hope he can be the one to vanquish our 3rd round curse.

MVP2110 wrote:

stillgotgame wrote:

Iheartfootball wrote:
I don’t think it’s quite so black and white. It’s the fine art of combining both.

It is. But when your decisions are clouded by a second variable - in this case need - it greatly reduces the chances of success.
As a comparison in my 25 years at my engineering firm I've seen many coincidences like this. A cheaper process or a more convenient method comes up and shortcuts are taken.
I have no idea how our draft will come out though. We'll see.

It really isn't black and white. You'll notice when I put out my top 102 board I had tiers of players. Those were all players I had graded roughly similar value, when the Packers are up its perfectly logical to select within that tier of players and go based on positional need. Now if you start reaching into a different tier to grab a player then it becomes an issue but without seeing the Packers board we have no idea if that's what they did.

Makes sense. Damn, you put a lot of effort into this. I'm a casual.
I get what you're saying though. LVN was a value pick according to the board. I think you called it too.
Glad we didn't reach for a 24 year old TE that can't block.

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:

ReasonablySober wrote:

paulpressey25 wrote:Don't understand the Kicker and QB picks. Both seem to have massive red flags.

There has to be some "we see something others don't" going on here.

To me this is a key as to whether Gutey is a long-term success or not. Does he mine great value out of something that isn't obvious to the rest of the league.

Kicker has a history with our ST coach. QB is one of the best athletes at his position. Easy to understand the picks with that context.

I only know 3 things about this QB based on reading this board.
1. He objectively sucks
2. He is one of the most athletic QBs.
3. He is the smartest QB in the draft (or whatever wording was in the quote).
Lol I don't understand anything about this pick

I don' get it either,
How can he be so smart and athletic but still suck?
Perplexing.

HammyTime wrote:

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:

ReasonablySober wrote:
Kicker has a history with our ST coach. QB is one of the best athletes at his position. Easy to understand the picks with that context.

I only know 3 things about this QB based on reading this board.
1. He objectively sucks
2. He is one of the most athletic QBs.
3. He is the smartest QB in the draft (or whatever wording was in the quote).
Lol I don't understand anything about this pick

I don' get it either,
How can he be so smart and athletic but still suck?
Perplexing.

Arm is super bad? He knows what and when to do, but just can't do it.

Mags FTW wrote:Is Silverstein's pod worth listening to?

I like Andy Herman’s podcast. Think he’s one of the most measured and even keeled packers reporter out there. Does a ton of tape study as well and just off the top of my head Is generally pretty accurate with his quantifiable takes.

TroyD92 wrote:

Mags FTW wrote:Is Silverstein's pod worth listening to?

I like Andy Herman’s podcast. Think he’s one of the most measured and even keeled packers reporter out there. Does a ton of tape study as well and just off the top of my head Is generally pretty accurate with his quantifiable takes.

Yeah I like Herman as well. A lot of the Packer pods I just can’t get into.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

MoMM wrote:

HammyTime wrote:

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:I only know 3 things about this QB based on reading this board.
1. He objectively sucks
2. He is one of the most athletic QBs.
3. He is the smartest QB in the draft (or whatever wording was in the quote).
Lol I don't understand anything about this pick

I don' get it either,
How can he be so smart and athletic but still suck?
Perplexing.

Arm is super bad? He knows what and when to do, but just can't do it.

Wretchedly bad. To call him Tebow-esque would be too generous.

Also (as MD stated) not only will Van Ness and Will McDonald will always be linked together because of the Rodgers trade but Brian Branch and Reed will too because of the Lions trade.

I really hope we got the best of those trades.

Assuming that the Packers pick up the 5th year option on Love today, how much cap room are they looking to have in 2024 free agency?

Profound23 wrote:Also (as MD stated) not only will Van Ness and Will McDonald will always be linked together because of the Rodgers trade but Brian Branch and Reed will too because of the Lions trade.

I really hope we got the best of those trades.

The packers did get Wicks and Brooks because they moved down from 45, so have to add how they do too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They gave Carlson #17 and of course, everyone brings up Davante. They really gotta let that go lol.