TT Predraft Media Conference

aaprigs311 · Post #1 » by **aaprigs311** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:54 pm

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/insider/index.shtml

Monday, April 20, 2009
Thompson speaks

Packers GM Ted Thompson will hold his predraft media conference shortly here in the Lambeau Field media auditorium. As I wrote in the roundup this morning, don't expect him to say much ... but whatever he does say, we'll have here.

UPDATE: No breaking news. I did go back and expand his first few answers regarding trading down.

* On trading down: "First and foremost, I thought when we first came here that we needed to build up the core of our team a little bit -- that we were a little short in that regard. So, in order to do that, we started trading down. Trading down, trading up -- it's all a question of supply and demand. If it's your pick (and) there are multiple players that you would like to have at that pick and you don't have any real hard preference ... then sometimes, especially if you're trying to build up your core, then it makes a lot of sense to move back and pick up an extra pick later on."

* At some point, once built core, get to point where doesn't make sense to trade down? "Well, I think so. Yeah. ... At some point, if everything worked perfectly and all your picks worked perfectly and they were all really good players and that sort of thing, then I think after awhile you'd have diminishing returns, sure."

* Are you at that point? "I don't know that we're at that (point). ... I like our team. I've said that before, I continue to say it. I think we have a sound foundation and some core players here. I don't think you can ever get in a position where you stop trying to get better, and I think creating competition for the summer activity and for training camp makes for a better team in the fall."

* On challenging economics of high draft picks? Have heard that for several years. "At the end of the day, nobody's going to pass. Nobody's going to not pick."

* Strategy change with high pick? Different group of players to look at. Little more focused on that group. Focus in on 9 and focus on second pick at 41 ... less focus on guys in between. All about applying resources.

* How does draft board work? Have all positions across a long wall. Offense on left, defense on right. Horizontal lines dividing players by round for each position.

* Go through scenarios? Make sure positions are balanced properly. Easier to balance by position. Start with getting positions right, then make sure rounds match up between players at different positions.

* Less margin for error because not active in free agency? "I haven't thought of it in those terms. ... I think the draft's very important, and it's important" whether you're active in free agency or not.

* If not looking between 9 and 41, that mean not trading? No, just focusing on those spots, "but you work on them all."

* Any position wouldn't touch because not a need? "No." Evaluate players way should be evaluated, despite current makeup of team.

* How many players seen personally this year? Doesn't look at it that way. In fall, went to 23 or 24 schools, and at combine saw everyone. Also been to a few pro days. Collectively, Packers have been at far more than that.

* On predraft visits? Allowed 30, not including area players. Had in about 20.

* Go for certain type of player in lower rounds? "It varies. It kind of depends on where you are." Sometimes go for big guys, because they're hard to find. Sometimes, go for the athlete.

* If two players are equal, rather have senior or junior? All things equal, probably senior, because has one more year experience, in football and in life.

* What measures go through to make sure good player off the field? A lot of things. Starts with area guys doing hard work leading up to January. Interviewing, talking to people from hometowns, etc. Anytime get in front of player, try to get to know people around him. Psychological tests. Everyone makes mistakes; young people are especially prone. "We're trying to predict the future there."

* Use phantom Facebook pages to monitor prospects? "I've never heard of it. If we do it, I'd be shocked. Actually, we don't do it. But I've never even heard of that. Quite frankly, I don't know what a Facebook is. I mean, I understand the theory behind it, but I never get on one, as far as I can tell. Unless I've been on y'all's."

* On fitting guy to 3-4 defensive scheme: "It all comes back to, how good a player is the guy?" Different body types and whatnot, but doesn't affect much.

* Anyone off draft board because of character: Won't talk about this year. "There have been in the past, and there probably will be in the future, guys we'll take off our board."

* What's it take to get to that point? "What we do is we try to make a decision ... it's my call, that is this a good guy or a bad guy?" People make mistakes. "If we think he's a bad guy, then we're not going to mess with him."

* Success rate in getting guys want in rookie free agency? "It's chaos. It's absolute chaos. We think we have a pretty good system." Four guys working, all next to one another. Think done pretty well.

* Difference in scouting small-school guys? Not much. Due diligence on anyone think can play. Those are guys who are brought in for visits, physicals, etc.

* Fifth draft here ... what's your batting average? "This is a 'we' thing. ... I think we've done OK." Not an exact science. Think added lot of core value to team.

* Going into weekend, is there a need you have to have? "No, I don't see it that way. I think there's certain scenarios that you'd rather the thing fall. But I think we've built the team up core-wise where we're not in a position where we have to do anything."

That's about it for now. Nothing about specific prospects, as is his custom.

-- Tom Pelissero, tpelisse@greenbaypressgazette.com

aaprigs311 · Post #2 » by **aaprigs311** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:57 pm

A few interesting tidbits, but not much we didn't already know..

Post #3 » by **ReasonablySober** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:03 pm

If you throw need out the window we could see anything on Saturday. OLB, NT and OT might be the biggest needs but if there's a WR, RB, TE or DB with a higher grade on their board, we might be in for a surprise.

MikeIsGood · Post #4 » by **MikeIsGood** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:27 pm

I certainly won't complain if need is thrown out the window and we go BPA. I guess it depends on who they feel the BPA is given the board at the time

I'm stoked for the draft, though. I can't wait.

aaprigs311 · Post #5 » by **aaprigs311** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:27 pm

If Raji and Andre Smith are both off the board I do expect a surprise. Tyson Jackson, Robert Ayers, Sean Smith, Maclin, Moreno.. Who really knows? I'm praying for Raji because I think he's our best shot. Raji did NOT fail his combine drug test either. That probably doesn't help our cause.

eagle13 · Post #6 » by **eagle13** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:09 am

Raji does not seem too be in the cards

failed test = Pack pass b/c of charater
passed test = is taken b4 #9

eagle13 · Post #7 » by **eagle13** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:26 am

As for BPA?

BPA is only as good as those evaluating/grading the talent. Was Pack right about Hawk or Harrel as the BPA? Considering Pack's success has been mediocre so far as far as producing many major impact players - the Pack taking the their BPA doesn't mean much.

The Pack need a NT, OLB, OT, DE, CB. If Pack can't find a prospect among those 5 positions that aren't rated at least very close to bpa I would be questioning and will watch how well players at those 5 positions taken after #9 perform.

This year just avoid the obvious red flags - questionable character, injury history, low inteligence, poor conditioning, short time as starter and take BPA of those 5 spots.

Post #8 » by **Jollay** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:31 am

I'm sorry, we need to address some needs in the draft if we're not going to do it in FA. There are some glaring holes in year 5 of this team where we've been in the playoffs once at the positions DB named.

I mean if TT doesn't feel urgency and wants to take a receiver first or something, then so be it. But I think he's risking his job even if what he does might even turn out to be best for us long term.

No shockers really. TT playing it close to the vest as he obviously should. Don't even know why they bother to have the event, not like he'll tip his hand.

Kerb Hohl · Post #9 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:25 am

Jollay, I agree with you somewhat...I think TT needs a bit more urgency.

However, I'm going to at least trust him on his judgement on our holes. If he is wrong this year I'm going to blast him.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/43202507.html

May not mean much, but another NFL exec thinks we are pretty solid all around...including places most think we aren't.

last year, you could have lived with him being confident that we didn't have a ton of holes after going 13-3. Whether it was injuries or just bad luck, it didn't happen for us last year. Don't chastise me for blasting Hammond and not TT because TT had a year of a successful team preceding it so you could live with him making minimal moves. As for Hammond, he had a crappy team and made a bunch of lateral and head-scratching moves.

However, last year raised a red flag that there COULD be an issue with this core. TT could have blown up or filled holes in it, and he is doing that to an extent. However, he is sticking pretty confident with his current hand, so if they blow it again this year, TT is going to be on the hot seat with me.

Post #10 » by **Jollay** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:53 pm

CharlosVllnueva wrote:Jollay, I agree with you somewhat...I think TT needs a bit more urgency.

However, I'm going to at least trust him on his judgement on our holes. If he is wrong this year I'm going to blast him.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/43202507.html

May not mean much, but another NFL exec thinks we are pretty solid all around...including places most think we aren't.

last year, you could have lived with him being confident that we didn't have a ton of holes after going 13-3. Whether it was injuries or just bad luck, it didn't happen for us last year. Don't chastise me for blasting Hammond and not TT because TT had a year of a successful team preceding it so you could live with him making minimal moves. As for Hammond, he had a crappy team and made a bunch of lateral and head-scratching moves.

However, last year raised a red flag that there COULD be an issue with this core. TT could have blown up or filled holes in it, and he is doing that to an extent. However, he is sticking pretty confident with his current hand, so if they blow it again this year, TT is going to be on the hot seat with me.

I don't think we're terrible, but I disagree with some of that guys' assessments.

Fine with Michael Montgomery? I'm okay with bringing him back (christ we just need bodies at a minimum) but he needs to put on weight and was average at best in a scheme that better suited him.

I call that a big hole.

I agree though, the proof is in the puddin. He goes 10-6 or up and none of this likely matters.

I just feel he is seriously risking his job even if he does whats right and takes the best player available.