Signs point to Clowney being a hit that the Packers let get away. :(

Honestly that looks random. I would argue all day.

You wouldn't rate Brady Poppinga? Sure, he hasn't been a starter, but he's been a solid contributor and able to step in when called on.

I was surprised you labeled James Jones a hit - he's flashed potential, but he sure is hurt a lot.

OK I'll play. Poppinga, Montgomery, Blackmon, ~maybe Wynn~ I would call hits.

Three guys that were miscast by Sanders but have ST value or potential to be at least journeymen.

I agree with bomdad that Poppinga, Montgomery, Blackmon, and Wynn are all talented players who have just been misused and should be considered hits. The first three have been made contributions on the feild and have track records. Wynn as been scary talented when he has been healthy, but staying healthy has been the problem. I also beleive it is much to soon to cast Pat Lee into the role of a hit when he hasn't had enough time on the field to prove himself.

Wow, didn't realize we are drafting 2 receivers a year... But I guess if one of them is a hit each year, that aint too bad.

Where is Spitz?

Its tough to categorically say if someone is a hit or a miss. When you put Colledge in the same "hit" category as Rodgers it leaves a lot to be desired.

Sorry Aaron

You need to redo your analysis.
Forget where a player was drafted & then decide if they have been a hit or not.
Looks to me like you're be swayed by draft position & expectations resulting from that draft position.

Example: If B. Jackson had been drafted in the 7th round, would he then be a hit ??

When a player becomes a solid starter & maybe even an elite player, it no longer matters where he was drafted.

Rodgers is a star of the future.

Collins has potential but, missing early practices is not doing him any good.

Murphy, who knows how good he could have been. Early performance was unbelieveable. What a shame he suffered that devastating injury.

Underwood, I'd drop him.

Coston never really took over the position. After the 2007 injury, he lost whatever chance he had.

AJ is a good LB, I wish he was better.

After three years Colledge should have establish himself firmly as the Lineman of the future. He has not. His play last season was inconsistent and showed very little emotion. He could be better, but he needs to get an attitude.

Jennings a star, period.

Jolly worked his way up over four years to an average player. He was showing improvement throughout the 2008 season. Could end up being a good player.

Jones could be a real find. If he is healthy this year any talk of Crabtree or Maclin is foolish. GB already has one of those.

Barbre, why? Any evaluation of him is based on guess. I'd drop him.

Hall, must be based on ST play. If so, I'd add Blackmon.

Crosby, is very good. If he can make the game winning kicks in the last minute he could be great.

Nelson will be a good possesssion receiver.

Lee needs more reps to show what he has.

Finely could be a good stretch receiver at TE. Needs an attitude adjustment.

Thompson too small for DE and too slow for OLB in the 34. Could be a good DE in 43. Trade, maybe?

Sitton two games is not enough time to evaluate. Could be good, or not.

Flynn holds the ball. His one appearence was less than encouraging.

For those who think Montgomery is a player, watch the films. He is consistently trapped out of position.

I think a sucess is value at their draft position. If a 7th or 6th rounder makes your team for 3 years, he is a success. However Justin Harrell is not, yet.

What do you people expect from 4th round draft pics? To me making the team for 3 or 4 years is a success. You looking for HOF players from every pick? If that is the case, score for TT right now is zero.

How is Marvell Underwood a hit? How is a 6th round pick for Montgomery NOT a hit? How is Underwood a hit and Poppenga not? Some inconsistencies here.

Hits:

2005: Rodgers, Collins, Poppinga, Coston, Montgomery (Perhaps Whitticker he started 14 games and then was cut but he WAS a 7th round pick, they dont really make many teams)

2006: Hawk, Colledge, Jennings, Spitz, Blackmon, Moll, Jolly

2007: Too early to tell. I need 3 years.

2008: WAY to early to tell. They did ALL make our team, that is kind of impressive.

Overall TT is impressive, IMO

When you lay them out like this and start arguing about "hits" like Barbre, Colledge, or Flynn TTs great draft-scoping ability starts to like so much hype. It's not just the number of hits, but the quality of the hits. If you're going to field an elite team built on the draft, you have to hit a few out of the park. Not all, but a few. So far, TT has been a banjo hitter with a low OBA.

As a #5 pick, Hawk has been a disappointment. He's average at best. Worse, the guy has declined rather than improved. He's likely to get replaced if he doesn't turn that around.

I'm not impressed with Crosby. Yeah, he's a 6th rounder, but then again, he's a kicker. His leg is strong, but he hasn't been that accurate. He was 28th in FG percentage, which means there are 27 other kickers out there doing a better job. Missed his big kicks last year.

Jones has durability issues.

So, TT has hit on Rodgers, who fell into his lap, and Jennings. That's not going to win the the SB.

Here is the catch, if they make the team, could that just mean the guys that were on the team were not that good?

Ted's record as a GM is 31-33. Better than average if you consider the lack of talent he inherited and a lame duck season under Sherman.

Given your overall standards, Aaron, Wynn and Jackson should be highlighted, especially Wynn when considering where he was drafted. I'd also say so should Bishop and Blackmon, and perhaps even Monty. I mean, hell, if you're going to highlight Coston and Underwood. (I respect your, "I think they would have been good if they hadn't gotten grievously hurt" theory, but come on now.)

I'd have to say to be careful when rating players based on starts and making the team. If a pick makes the team is it because he's that good or the team is that bad? Same for starters.

Grhombre, Hawk actually improved from season one to season 2. Yes his stats declined, but that may have actually been because of better play. To use a quick example, good cornerbacks will almost always have fewer tackles/interceptions than bad cornerbacks because the ball comes their way a lot less. Yes, he performed poorly in '08, but there is reason to believe that he was hurt worse than he let on.

Off Topic:

Heard Gil Brandt on WSSP this afternoon. He said that he spent 10 hours with TT and Dorsey last week. He is sure the Packers will pick a Lineman. Could be either D or O. He mentioned Brown, Orakpo, Raji, A. Smith and Oher. I like that, hope it's going to happen.

How can Underwood and Murphy be hits? clearly Murphy's career was cut short and he had shown promise, but if that promise is unfulfilled, it is the same as a "miss" (albeit an unfortunate one). Underwood never showed much and still hasn't with other teams (am i mistaken?)...If you're going to call Murphy a hit, then shouldn't Hodge be one for the same reasons?

Will Blackmon should be hit for sure just based on his impact on the return game when healthy.....Bishop has proved to be a good speacial teamer and a cabable reserve.

okay- i am done nitpicking :)

Hey packer aaron I know you don't think Jones is tough but remember this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCnJpjj5jHk&feature=related

Awesome quote from Vandermuse chat yesterday and reminds me of how bad it can really get when you got guys who don't know what they are doing driving the bus
"Think about this: Devine being the rum-dum that he was, acquired three bad QBS -- Hadl, Del Gaizo and Jerry Tagge -- for the bargain basement price of three No. 1s, four No. 2s and a No. 3. Wow. That is staggering. And to think fans today complain about Ted Thompson because he covets his draft picks!"

TT's team doesn't play against Dan Devine's, Gorrest Fregg's, or even Sherman's, so TT being more astute than those guys doesn't get us anywhere.

Today's Chicago Sun-Times has a <a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/bears/2009/04/number_crunch_breaking_down_an.h... rel="nofollow">breakdown on Angelo's drafts</a>. He and TT seem very similar, though TT has done better with offense and Angelo with defense. The article references <a href="http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2009/04/cass... rel="nofollow">a study mentioned here</a> which uses as a metric the number of starters produced in each round.

It's an interesting way to look at the issue, not the only way to look at it, of course, but one.

Interesting Topic.

I'd personally give an incomplete grade on the WR whose career was cut tragically short. OTOH, I'd give a "Miss" Grade on Hodge. His bad Knees were known back then. That's why he was available in the 3rd Round.

If you swing for the fences on a #1 pick (ala Harrell), that should dock you more than a 7th Rounder. I give TT props on drafting Rodgers and letting him sit and learn. A lot of GMs would have either not drafted him or forced him into the line up early.

I heard Casserly the other day... he said that Luck plays a major role in drafting. I'd have to agree. Rodgers would be a prime example of that. If Harrell was able to stay healthy, TT's drafting would have looked a lot better. And, I would guess that the 2008 Defense would have been much better. We just didn't have the horses to deal with the injury to Jenkins and KGB and Barnett.

But Harrell hasn't stayed healthy. (Bad) Luck. Some feel that you can predict this. All of the Amateur GMs in the house. Shanahan of Denver stated that he would have taken Harrell if the Packers had not done so. Denver was picking next. So in retrospect, Harrell wouldn't have been there if we had made the Trade with Cleveland. Once again: Luck. You decide if it was good or bad

I think that one of the things that led to Sherman's downfall was his willingness to give up draft choices to secure "His Guy". If he was right, you had better 1st Level Guys (he wasn't always right). And then you have two spots to fill.

Just my thoughts...