Gazette & Journal grade Packer's season

[eagle13]

Both Press Gazette & Journal gave their grades today.
Gazette graded each player. Journal only each unit.
Both properly gave M3 bad marks.

Overall I agree. What do you all think?

Biggest surprise is how high Gazette graded Colledge.

[MickeyDavis]

Both Press Gazette & Journal gave their grades today.
Gazette graded each player. Journal only each unit.

Both papers graded each player.

I guess I could argue with a couple of grades but for the most part they are pretty accurate. McGinn does a little better job in explaining his reasoning.

[SugarRay34]

Could also argue a couple grades for the Journal. I was surprised that Barnett got a B. A lot of people including McGinn himself I believe was pretty hard on Barnett when he was healthy. I thought Woodson and Kampman were really the only ones to deserve A's. Collins although made a lot of plays he missed a whole bunch as well

[ReasonablySober]

How can you give incompletes to guys like Flynn and Lumpkin but give DeShawn Wynn a D+?

How does Brandon Jackson and (especially) Jordy Nelson deserve a C-? Jackson did everything he was supposed when he was in the game and Nelson dropped only one ball all season. Or Tory Humphrey? He wasn't asked to do much but he never dropped a ball or made a turnover. He got a D. Josh Sitton gets a C- and Allen Barbre gets an incomplete.

Rodgers is a top 10 QB in every statistical measure and put up numbers comparable, or better, than the league MVP AND had to deal with the Favre BS and gets a B-.

Nice work guys.

[paulpressey25]

McGinn had a great column on TT today. I'm pretty much in agreement with his thoughts.

-TT deserves huge credit for having A-Rod.
-TT needs to quit trading "quality" for "quantity" in the draft. We've got enough young players.
-Nelson, Brohm and Pat Lee all look pretty questionable right now as picks.
-Hawk fading out and Justin Harrell busting cost this team dearly on defense.
-MM deserves serious heat for the team having so many penalties and the linebacker play being so poor.
-The sack differential between the O-line (what they gave up) and D-line (sacks they got) was the worst since 1992. Hence both lines suck. The Packers apparently only forced one QB fumble all season.
-All that said, 13-game winners many times fade badly the next year, but bounce back the following season after that. So statistically the Packers should win 9-10 games next year with a 43% chance of making the playoffs.

[MickeyDavis]

McGinn had a great column on TT today. I'm pretty much in agreement with his thoughts.


-TT needs to quit trading "quality" for "quantity" in the draft. We've got enough young players.

Amen.

[ReasonablySober]

-Nelson, Brohm and Pat Lee all look pretty questionable right now as picks.

No, they really don't. Anyone who says otherwise is a complete fool. Yes, Bob McGinn, I'm speaking about you.

[paulpressey25]

Rodgers is a top 10 QB in every statistical measure and put up numbers comparable, or better, than the league MVP AND had to deal with the Favre BS and gets a B-..

I'd have given Rodgers an "A" based on what he had to deal with.

But I think these guys are weighting the teams win total very heavily. They would say that A-Rod had a Michael Redd like extremely efficient 25ppg season, but didn't make the big plays when they needed to be made.

[Wade-A-Holic]

I'm a big Rodgers apologist but you can't deny some of his late game struggles. Obviously that wasn't all on him, but he did force some throws that resulted in crucial mistakes at some critical junctures of games. That is the ONLY reason I can think of for downgrading him at all, though.

[Mags FTW]

-All that said, 13-game winners many times fade badly the next year, but bounce back the following season after that. So statistically the Packers should win 9-10 games next year with a 43% chance of making the playoffs.

The same guys (football prospectus or outsiders) who predicted us to be the surprise team last year have already said they expect us to have a good year next year. According to them we were very unlucky and bill simmons who often has them on his podcast said we pretty much broke their statistical model system this season.

I also agree with DB on questioning the grade of Nelson and labeling him a questionable pick. For him to do really well as a rookie (which WRs rarely do), either Jennings or driver would have to play poorly enough for nelson to get enough opportunities.

[paulpressey25]

Here's the exact transcript that McGinn wrote this morning in MJS:

".....In order for the Packers to get back on track, Thompson has to step up his overall game. For one thing, he has to stop trading down all the time. While it is true that more picks translates into better odds of securing good players, it also almost guarantees that the Packers will remain one of, if not the youngest team in the league.

Thompson should take his nine picks and exercise his nine picks, maybe going up, but in no way going down. Green Bay needs high quality players, not quantity. If it takes John Dorsey, John Schneider or Reggie McKenzie to unplug Thompson's hot-line, so be it.

For another he's got to draft better. The system, the packages and the formations always have created receivers here. The Packers didn't need Jordy Nelson where they took him, and quarterback Brian Brohm and Pat Lee weren't inspired second round selections, either.

It looks as if Thompson hit it big on Rodgers, and both safety Nick Collins and wide receiver Greg Jennings have emerged as Pro-Bowl caliber performers. But those are the only ones among his 43 picks to fit that description. Defenses shrivel up when first round choices fail, which defensive tackle Justin Harrell has done and linebacker A.J. Hawk did this year.

Thompson also must be more willing to take a chance in free agency or the trade market. It's OK if he stubs his toe a time or two. His record in unrestricted free agency, clearly a crapshoot, is better than the draft.

In the draft, Thompson has to forget about Harrell and his holdover tackles on offense and use the No. 9 pick for a lineman. The Packers had their worst sack differential (minus-7) since 1992, a telling indicator that neither line was very good......"

In all, McGinn is pretty complimentary about Thompson and what he's done, especially noting that paradoxically the team's strongest position is QB, this after Favre left. But he simply points out that his other moves the past 12-months haven't worked out that great.....yet.

[LUKE23]

Brandon Jackson's grade is an absolute joke. Look at his YPC average. He was arguably better than Grant was this year.

I also want to note something to the TT detractors:

Wolf/Holmgren and Thompson/McCarthy duos have the EXACT same record heading into season 4: 27-21.

[xTitan]

I totally disagree with McGinn about trading down as a matter of fact I am all for trading down from #9 because I am skeptical that there will be an impact player at a need position there. I am also starting to believe that Sanders is gone and the Packers are just waiting for Moss to be eliminated from the Rams search to announce that he will be the new D-Coordinator. I will be very curious to see the type of defense Moss would emply, I am guessing it will be a very fast, aggressive, attacking style of defense, which would determine the type of atheltes drafted......the Moss thing is just how I see things playing out.

[LUKE23]

Trading down/up is based on who is there. To bash it or advocate it in either direction doesn't make any sense, it is all situational and dependent on what the board looks like. People act like TT always trades down. He's traded down in one out of four first rounds (and would have stayed last year if Cason fell).

[paulpressey25]

You guys are misreading the trade down comment. He's not just referring to the first round, but TT"s proclivity to trade a single pick in rounds 2-7 for multiple picks further back. With his main point being that bringing in 14 more rookies next season won't get this team where it needs to go.

[ReasonablySober]

You guys are misreading the trade down comment. He's not just referring to the first round, but TT"s proclivity to trade a single pick in rounds 2-7 for multiple picks further back. With his main point being that bringing in 14 more rookies next season won't get this team where it needs to go.

Why not?

Greg Jennings and Jason Spitz were taken with a picks received in a trade down with New England in 2006. Will Blackmon was a pick received in a trade down. Jackson, Hall, Bishop and Rouse were all picks in trade downs. Jordy Nelson was a great value for where he was taken. Would have rather Thompson just took him in round one and not receive Jeremy Thompson?

Acquiring picks thins the herd. If you're only using six picks in the NFL draft you need to hit on a greater percentage and you're ignoring depth across your team.

Besides, in making this argument, McGinn assumes that Thompson is actually sacrificing talent for numbers. There's nothing to suggest that's the case at all. For all we know he had Nelson as the first or second best prospect on his board but figured he could get him a half dozen spots lower.

[dedned]

Man, some of you guys love you some Teddy boy. People that hate him can even admit he's done some things right. This is getting ridiculous.

[xTitan]

You guys are misreading the trade down comment. He's not just referring to the first round, but TT"s proclivity to trade a single pick in rounds 2-7 for multiple picks further back. With his main point being that bringing in 14 more rookies next season won't get this team where it needs to go.

What will get the team where it needs to go? I thought the object was to bring in talent any way possible.....T

[ReasonablySober]

Man, some of you guys love you some Teddy boy. People that hate him can even admit he's done some things right. This is getting ridiculous.

How about making a rational argument? Let's have a debate on the merits of dealing down, or up or free agency and its effect on roster building in the 2000s.

[El Duderino]

You guys are misreading the trade down comment. He's not just referring to the first round, but TT"s proclivity to trade a single pick in rounds 2-7 for multiple picks further back. With his main point being that bringing in 14 more rookies next season won't get this team where it needs to go.

Why not?

Greg Jennings and Jason Spitz were taken with a picks received in a trade down with New England in 2006. Will Blackmon was a pick received in a trade down. Jackson, Hall, Bishop and Rouse were all picks in trade downs. Jordy Nelson was a great value for where he was taken. Would have rather Thompson just took him in round one and not receive Jeremy Thompson?

Acquiring picks thins the herd. If you're only using six picks in the NFL draft you need to hit on a greater percentage and you're ignoring depth across your team.

Besides, in making this argument, McGinn assumes that Thompson is actually sacrificing talent for numbers. There's nothing to suggest that's the case at all. For all we know he had Nelson as the first or second best prospect on his board but figured he could get him a half dozen spots lower.

In general i don't have a problem with trading down, depth is obviously important in a violent sport like football where injuries almost have to be assumed as a given to happen. That said, if the Packers want to rise back into legit contender status, Thompson has to start hitting more triples and homers, especially on defense and the offensive line. Guys like Jackson, Hall, and Rouse haven't exactly been playmakers and similar mediocrity like them fill NFL rosters across the league. If we waived Hall today, would anyone even claim him? Rouse was a big liability all year. I like Bishop and maybe he can become more than decent depth, but he needs a chance to start before we'll know. Spitz in his time starting at guard hasn't hurt the Packers, but would he even rank in the top 30 among the 60 starting guards in the NFL?

Thompson can do as he pleases in continuing to build the Packers, GM's in all pro sports have varying philosophies they prefer to follow. If he wants to keep being conservative, pretty much avoid free agency, trade down all the time, and mainly just use the draft, that's his call. He then will have to draft better than he has, particularly on defense. If Ted does that and we win at least 10 games next year and make the playoffs, he'll deserve credit and fans should get off his back. If that doesn't happen and we are left watching the playoffs again, he should be on the hot seat to be replaced. How a NFL team is built isn't nearly as relevant as whether they win because winning is what GM's are paid to do, not to compare philosophies.