Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Cadmus

Share Your 53 Man Roster Predictions

Recommended Posts

On ‎04‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 11:09 PM, Greg C. said:

If throwaway is the wrong term, then why do you say it "has no real value"? Isn't that the definition of throwaway? And if that's the case, why are 7th round picks so often included in trades? 

I think a good front office is one that sweats the details and puts thought and research into every decision. This includes not only the 7th round picks, but the UFDAs as well. I understand the argument for picking a physical freak who can't play the game or a special teams role player if he's someone who has a chance to really make a difference. And I would even go along with the long snapper decision if he had a really high chance of being a long-term starter, but I think that with a long snapper you're gambling just like you are at every other position. I hope the guy they drafted is rock solid and plays for 12 years. Then the pick arguably will have been worth it. I just think that he's far from a shoo-in, and they would have been better off picking a player who has more upside. 

Having said that, this is a relatively minor complaint that I have about the draft picks. I don't consider it to be a big deal. The long-snapper pick just seemed a bit reactionary on the part of the GM, and it also makes me worry that the coaches may be lobbying for certain picks and affecting his decisions too much. 

I'd suspect 7th round picks are often in trades for 3 reasons:

1. For a multi-pick trade, the 7th rounders are probably there to make up the numbers in what the teams doing the trading want from a value chart

2. When trading a player for the 7th - they are convenient. The team giving away the player (that would have been cut) likes to think and say they 'got something' whereas the team giving away the pick is ok to lose what is such a low value pick. So both are happy. 

3. It also puts a trade value on a player that is somewhere slightly above nothing. In the same way a 7th round pick is essentially a priority UDFA, trading a 7th round is like getting first dibs on a soon to be released free agent.

You also have to bear in mind, the position of the pick. The first pick of the 7th round is practically a 6th. Whereas a pick at the end of the 7th which is where we took Bradley is practically undrafted. Ultimately Gutes probably thought that Bradley was more likely to make the team better than a 'proper player'. On the basis he thought he would probably make the team. Marginal gains and all that. If Bradley improved the long snapping then it helps the team more than a guy on the practice squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mikemike778 said:

I'd suspect 7th round picks are often in trades for 3 reasons:

1. For a multi-pick trade, the 7th rounders are probably there to make up the numbers in what the teams doing the trading want from a value chart

2. When trading a player for the 7th - they are convenient. The team giving away the player (that would have been cut) likes to think and say they 'got something' whereas the team giving away the pick is ok to lose what is such a low value pick. So both are happy. 

3. It also puts a trade value on a player that is somewhere slightly above nothing. In the same way a 7th round pick is essentially a priority UDFA, trading a 7th round is like getting first dibs on a soon to be released free agent.

You also have to bear in mind, the position of the pick. The first pick of the 7th round is practically a 6th. Whereas a pick at the end of the 7th which is where we took Bradley is practically undrafted. Ultimately Gutes probably thought that Bradley was more likely to make the team better than a 'proper player'. On the basis he thought he would probably make the team. Marginal gains and all that. If Bradley improved the long snapping then it helps the team more than a guy on the practice squad.

At some point you just look at the numbers.

If you have to pay a vet 1 million ish, and can pay the rookie 500k for 4 years, you've essentially saved 2 million dollars over 4 years.

There's HTZ's extra 1% of the cap for Rodgers' contract

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2018 at 5:09 PM, Greg C. said:

If throwaway is the wrong term, then why do you say it "has no real value"? Isn't that the definition of throwaway? And if that's the case, why are 7th round picks so often included in trades? 

I think a good front office is one that sweats the details and puts thought and research into every decision. This includes not only the 7th round picks, but the UFDAs as well. I understand the argument for picking a physical freak who can't play the game or a special teams role player if he's someone who has a chance to really make a difference. And I would even go along with the long snapper decision if he had a really high chance of being a long-term starter, but I think that with a long snapper you're gambling just like you are at every other position. I hope the guy they drafted is rock solid and plays for 12 years. Then the pick arguably will have been worth it. I just think that he's far from a shoo-in, and they would have been better off picking a player who has more upside. 

Having said that, this is a relatively minor complaint that I have about the draft picks. I don't consider it to be a big deal. The long-snapper pick just seemed a bit reactionary on the part of the GM, and it also makes me worry that the coaches may be lobbying for certain picks and affecting his decisions too much. 

They're usually throw in because it helps balance a trade, or at the very least seals a trade.  I mean, go look at the trades from this year's draft.  The Bills got a 7th round pick as part of the Josh Allen trade because they gave up 3 picks to move to select Allen.  Likewise, when the Packers traded back up they gave 3 picks and got a 7th round pick in return.  When the Steelers moved up to select Mason Rudolph, they gave up a 7th round pick.  That likely means Seahawks saw it as essentially a meaningless trade down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2018 at 8:53 AM, Cadmus said:

DL: Mike Daniels, Muhammad Wilkerson, Kenny Clark, Montravius Adams, Dean Lowry [5/29]

Daniels, Wilkerson, Clark, and Adams are all roster locks. Lowry is on a rookie contract and has been relatively useful when provided with opportunities, should be considered a near-lock. Lancaster could force his way onto the roster, but that's about all there is to say about the DL position.

 

Pettine talked about it multiple times and in the link below DL coach Jerry Montgomery talks about it too. Rotation, Rotation, Rotation for the DL. Gotta keep em fresh for the full game and the full season. That's why I think GB keeps 6 DL this year

Could be Tyler Lancaster, could be a vet cut, could be Looney or Mbu ( I think those guys are a year away )

But coach Montgomery paraphrased Pettine and said:  " Cut their reps in half instead of them trying to get through a full quarter" 

" We're going to rotate upfront a lot more than we have in the past"

https://www.packers.com/news/healthy-montravius-adams-eager-to-get-to-work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson, Lowry, M.Adams and maybe one other. Also guys like Biegel and Gilbert can cycle in and be a designated rusher as well, especially when the Packers run those 2xDL fronts.

It is possible to have a formation with 2x DL (say Daniels and Montgomery), plus Matthews, Perry, Biegel, Gilbert and still have 5xDBs (although it is more likely at least one true ILB is on the field). Lots of possibilities. It's tricky to know what to do as a QB, when you might have as few as two guys rushing the passer.........or up to six.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 From AG20's offseason write-up:

"Pettine plays a much heavier scheme than Capers"

This coupled with the comments from Coach Montgomery suggest a robust rotation of Big Guys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2018 at 1:51 PM, OneTwoSixFive said:

Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson, Lowry, M.Adams and maybe one other. Also guys like Biegel and Gilbert can cycle in and be a designated rusher as well, especially when the Packers run those 2xDL fronts.

It is possible to have a formation with 2x DL (say Daniels and Montgomery), plus Matthews, Perry, Biegel, Gilbert and still have 5xDBs (although it is more likely at least one true ILB is on the field). Lots of possibilities. It's tricky to know what to do as a QB, when you might have as few as two guys rushing the passer.........or up to six.

Would Burks and Donnerson fill the athletic requirements for what you would look for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't see it in Donnerson.  With the little I have seen of him on the field, he doesn't look at all like the testing results and I think it is because he doesn't have the instincts.  That results in play that is slow and tentative, and that was against lower level competition.  I could be wrong, but I don't know that he will make the roster or even the practice squad.  Note though, I have been wrong before.

That being said, I feel like Pettine will go with more 3 DL sets, and I like what I saw in James Looney playing for Cal last year.  I think he might be a guy who might surprise fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

I just don't see it in Donnerson.  With the little I have seen of him on the field, he doesn't look at all like the testing results and I think it is because he doesn't have the instincts.  That results in play that is slow and tentative, and that was against lower level competition.  I could be wrong, but I don't know that he will make the roster or even the practice squad.  Note though, I have been wrong before.

That being said, I feel like Pettine will go with more 3 DL sets, and I like what I saw in James Looney playing for Cal last year.  I think he might be a guy who might surprise fans.

I am not counting on Donnerson either.  Just looking for those LBs that could pass rush or play traditional LB positions if thrown into that type of confusing formation.  I wouldn't count on Burks to consistently rush the passer either, probably like Perry in coverage.  Donnerson only makes this roster if he excels on special teams or we are catastrophically unlucky with injuries in the preseason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DavidatMIZZOU said:

Would Burks and Donnerson fill the athletic requirements for what you would look for?

Yes they are both athletic enough, but no, I don't see them doing much this year. Next year, perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Packers Wire: Article on GB OL and specifically Bryan Bulaga

“He’s doing excellent; he’s way ahead of schedule,” Gutekunst said, via ESPN. “Those are big injuries. He’s fought through those things before, we expect him to do that again. But yeah, we expect him to be a part of our team.”

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2018/07/13/bryan-bulaga-holds-key-to-packers-having-top-offensive-line/

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-nfl-offensive-line-rankings-all-32-teams-units-entering-2018

Pro Football Focus recently ranked the NFL’s 32 offensive lines. The Packers came in at No. 9, a ranking based heavily on Green Bay having two talented and reliable offensive tackles bookending the group.

“What the Packers have – when healthy – that few in the NFL can boast are a pair of bookend tackles that you feel comfortable putting on an island snap after snap,” PFF’s Mike Renner. “No chips or slides necessary, David Bakhtiari and Bryan Bulaga are as good as it gets in pass protection. Bakhtiari was the highest-graded left tackle in pass protection this past season (90.5) while Bulaga earned the highest pass protection grade of any right tackle his last healthy season in 2016 (89.3).”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×