First off, as a disclaimer, let me just warn everyone that I am the last person that should be utilizing the likes of formulas, tables, and basic algebra. I loathe numbers in general, and find math to be a thoroughly detestable discipline.

With that being said, doesn't running a few meaningless calculations and coming up with your own simplistic, probably-not-applicable formulations make you feel like you really know what you're talking about?

Yah, I thought so.

Basically, that's what I've done. We can all grade the picks and then look at our grades and get a rough idea of how the team did overall and hand out a grade accordingly. I wanted to do something a bit more in depth. Not only have I graded each pick but I have come up with a conversion table in order to apply some more value to higher picks. It is, of course, not the result of any statistical analysis I've conducted, but rather my wandering mind during my 11:45 lecture. Here are the rates I used dependent on the round.

There are some obvious kinks with this table. First of all, according to it, the difference in value between the 32nd and the 33rd pick is the same as the difference between the 1st and the 56th. This would definitely be a problem if I used this conversion table for every pick of the draft. However, the Packers generally drafted in the top half of the round, so I don't think the values will be skewed too much.

On to the grades. I used the basic 4.0 scale that most of us are all familiar with. Essentially an A translates to a 4.0, a B to a 3.0, a C to 2.0 and on ward. A "+" or a "-" will move a grade up or down 1/3 respectively.

But what exactly does each grade mean? Again keeping with the theme of simplicity, it's pretty straight-forward. If a pick got an A, I think it was the perfect pick at that spot in the draft. A B denotes that I generally liked the pick, but that something kept it out of the A range, possibly what I felt was a bit of a reach or maybe character concerns that come along with the player. A C-grade is basically neutral. A D I definitely don't like, and an F, if there was one, would probably translate to "What was Teddy on when he made this selection?"

So onward to the picks! You'll see in the 5th column the overall score of the draftee after I've factored in the value of the pick. And, of course, on the far right are my comments on why each selection deserved what I gave it. Follow the jump to my overall team grade.

The next step is to assess the team's overall performance by computing a total grade much like we would a cumulative GPA.Sounds kind of scary right? Don't worry, I have a rudimentary understanding of basic multiplication and division! Yay, Math!

First off, we add up the all the total scores of the players selected (69.166).

Next, we add up all the base values of each pick we used. (5+5+2.5+2+2+1.5+1.5+1=20.5)

And finally, we divide the total score by the base value...

(69.166/20.5)

... for a final GPA of 3.4.

Roughly, translates to a B+.

Which, in all honesty, is probably what I would've given them regardless of all this mumbo-jumbo.

I feel a B+ is a very appropriate grade. The Packers made some noise in the first round, taking two of the finest defenders in the draft. However, in the process, they deprived themselves of a pick until the fourth round. Simply put, we didn't have to give up both third-rounders to nab Matthews. We were still able to get some quality players later on, including the gem of the draft, Jamon Meredith, but this year's haul lacked the plethora of mid-range quality we've come to expect. All in all, I am one happy camper, and can't wait to get these guys on the field.