This team needs a 2nd round WR/TE/RB or equivalent FA

[skibrett15]

team has spriggs on the bench.  How many teams have a 2nd round pick on the bench who hasn't fallen flat on his face when forced into action?  Spriggs isn't amazing, but the guy is an NFL lineman, and a borderline starting caliber RT.

It also lost several options at RG before settling on byron bell.  Sorry, but if Byron Bell is your complaint about this OL, then it's a really good OL.

 

[coachbuns]

1 minute ago, skibrett15 said:

team has spriggs on the bench.  How many teams have a 2nd round pick on the bench who hasn't fallen flat on his face when forced into action?  Spriggs isn't amazing, but the guy is an NFL lineman, and a borderline starting caliber RT.

It also lost several options at RG before settling on byron bell.  Sorry, but if Byron Bellat  is your complaint about this OL, then it's a really good OL.

 

Sorry, he's strictly a backup.  For a 2nd round pick who has been in the system for a while now, he just hasn't developed into a starter.  If you have Spriggs and Bell as starters on the right side of your line,  Rodgers will be running for his life.

[Mr. Fussnputz]

19 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

team has spriggs on the bench.  How many teams have a 2nd round pick on the bench who hasn't fallen flat on his face when forced into action?  Spriggs isn't amazing, but the guy is an NFL lineman, and a borderline starting caliber RT.

It also lost several options at RG before settling on byron bell.  Sorry, but if Byron Bell is your complaint about this OL, then it's a really good OL.

 

Aren't we league leaders in third down sacks?

[Packerraymond]

16 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Aren't we league leaders in third down sacks?

We're also probably league leaders in yelling "would you throw the effing ball please!?" at our TVs on 3rd down.

[vegas492]

13 hours ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Aren't we league leaders in third down sacks?

 

12 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

We're also probably league leaders in yelling "would you throw the effing ball please!?" at our TVs on 3rd down.

I think I'm leading the league in thrown remote controls on third down.  Time Warner probably thinks I need anger management counseling.

[SSG]

13 hours ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Aren't we league leaders in third down sacks?

That's a combination of protection, Rodgers not being a god on every snap and having one quality pass catcher for the majority of the season.  While Rodgers has surely missed some guys that became open later in his progression the pass catchers haven't done him any favors.  They've struggled to consistently get open all season and Adams is the only one worth a turd in the scramble drill for the majority of the season (Cobb's had some moments as well as junk yard football is what he's best at).  

[CWood21]

21 hours ago, SSG said:

It's not hyperbole.  You are ignoring opportunity, which is a key part to this comparison.    MVS has 140 more offensive snaps this year than Janis had in his 4 year career in Green Bay.  Janis seen 4 games in his Packer career with more than 50% of the offensive snaps compared to 9 for MVS this year.   Production comes with opportunity and MVS has gotten a substantial amount of opportunity by default this year.   If you compare the games in which they received similar opportunity (50%+ of offensive snaps), Jeff Janis was more productive averaging more catches, yards and TDs per game.  I'm no Janis fan but the fact that you left out the Arizona playoff game out of your comparison shows that you aren't all that capable of comparing the 2 players objectively.  I'd imagine you are right about Janis' wishes.  I'm sure he'd have loved to have seen the massive snap count  MVS has seen this year.  

It really is.  In 4 years, Janis never could break the WR rotation.  And the only time he got significant amount of reps was when we were completely depleted.  And I'm not taking a single game and trying to extrapolate that over an entire season.  There's a reason why Janis never got on the field.

[CWood21]

20 hours ago, Victor1124 said:

While I’m on board with going defense and offensive lineman early; Let’s say we hypothetically sign an edge like Barrett and a safety like Thomas/Joyner/Mathieu/Boston; we also resign defensive guys like Ryan, Breeland, and Wilkerson. Then draft an edge and OT in the 1st round. Would we then be in a position to grab an offensive playmaker using our 2nd rounder?

That would make me more comfortable with going with a WR/TE/RB in the 2nd round.  I'm not real thrilled with our EDGE situation, and our CB situation seems a bit risky.

[CWood21]

20 hours ago, TheBitzMan said:

Have you watched the Rams since their bye week? They are not doing just fine, their offense is in trouble. 

They've done just fine by my estimation.  They put up 30 points against Detroit.  Chicago which is a top 3 defense held them to 6 points, which isn't totally surprising.  Chicago has given up 20+ points five times this season.  They're a damn good defense.  And the turnovers are what did them in against the Eagles.

[CWood21]

20 hours ago, vegas492 said:

I'll bite.

And the answer is yes.  It should be in the mix.  Lots of other moving parts there, but in a nutshell, I think round 2 is where you start looking at WR's and even RB's.  But...they need to be much better prospects than their defensive counterparts.  

I thought that Cwood summed it up really well a while ago...could even be on a different thread.  It's more about players on defense..than it is scheme.  More about scheme than players on offense.  At least I thought that was his point...I'm sure he will correct me if I messed that up...and rightly so.

Correct.  I'm more interested in talent level on defense.

[TheBitzMan]

11 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

They've done just fine by my estimation.  They put up 30 points against Detroit.  Chicago which is a top 3 defense held them to 6 points, which isn't totally surprising.  Chicago has given up 20+ points five times this season.  They're a damn good defense.  And the turnovers are what did them in against the Eagles.

Fine?

Goff @ DET - 17/33 for 207 YDS 1TD/1INT it was 23 to 16 and Stafford threw a pick at his own 25 to get them to 30. 

Goff @ CHI - 20/44 for 180 YDS 0TD/4 INT

Goff v. PHI - 35/54 for 339 YDS 0TD/2 INT

That is a 1:7 TD:INT ratio. On top of his numbers without Kupp & Gurley being banged up, this offense is not fine...

[CWood21]

Just now, TheBitzMan said:

Fine?

Goff @ DET - 17/33 for 207 YDS 1TD/1INT it was 23 to 16 and Stafford threw a pick at his own 25 to get them to 30. 

Goff @ CHI - 20/44 for 180 YDS 0TD/4 INT

Goff v. PHI - 35/54 for 339 YDS 0TD/2 INT

That is a 1:7 TD:INT ratio. On top of his numbers without Kupp & Gurley being banged up, this offense is not fine...

So your issue is with his decision making?  With or without Kupp, if Goff throws it to the defensive player Kupp isn't making an impact.  He's obviously better with his weapons, nobody is denying that.

[TheBitzMan]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

So your issue is with his decision making?  With or without Kupp, if Goff throws it to the defensive player Kupp isn't making an impact.  He's obviously better with his weapons, nobody is denying that.

I am disputing your argument that the offense is doing fine without Kupp when every number/metric points to the opposite. Their offense relies so much on 11 personnel that losing one of the key pieces has effected them more than you are leading on. This is similar to what happened to Rodgers without Jordy. 

I am more in favor of the Packers investing in the defense but I wouldn't be upset if they went all in on offense. The quickest way for this team to contend is on offense. 

 

[SSG]

8 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

It really is.  In 4 years, Janis never could break the WR rotation.  And the only time he got significant amount of reps was when we were completely depleted.  And I'm not taking a single game and trying to extrapolate that over an entire season.  There's a reason why Janis never got on the field.

But it isn't.  The ONLY reason either MVS or EQ broke the WR rotation is because of injury to a terrible WR core (Cobb was a lot worse than I think anyone anticipated).  When that WR core was at at full strength and healthy  MVS was seeing 6 snaps a game (EQ didn't receive a snap on in any game that both Allison and Cobb played in).  In the  4 games in which we had all 3 starting WRs play (not necessarily 100% but on the field) he had just 3 catches for 48 yards (one of those catches being a 40 yarder).

I don't get the fascination  with the rookies.  For the most part MVS has been getting starting caliber snaps since week 4 because of the injuries.  He had a couple good games over that stretch but for the most part has struggled.  Over the last 5 games  he's contributed just 7 catches despite getting a massive snap count up until recently.   I know AR12 missed him once or twice but the idea that his lack of production is all the QB's fault is trash.  Heck,  EQ passed him on the depth chart 2 weeks ago and Kumerow had an equal snap count with the offense this last week.

 

[Victor1124]

47 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

That would make me more comfortable with going with a WR/TE/RB in the 2nd round.  I'm not real thrilled with our EDGE situation, and our CB situation seems a bit risky.

A lot will depend on how active we are in free agency; the scenario I described would make me feel the most comfortable taking a WR or TE in the second. I do think we desperately need a playmaker who can attack the middle of the field. 

I think we have to go veteran Edge in free agency and 1st round Edge in the draft. That along with Perry,Fackrell, and Gilbert would make me somewhat comfortable about our Edge situation. 

Kevin King’s health makes our CB situation uncomfortable but If we resigned Breeland or another starting caliber free agent for multiple years, along with the amount of other needs we have. I’d be disappointed going corner early again. I’m sure King is on a short leash with his health but I doubt the Packers are ready to move on from him.

Edited December 19, 2018 by Victor1124