Jump to content

NFC North Rivals 2019 Talk


dll2000

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Fant is clearly a better prospect than Gary. As is Bradbury. Argue against that if you must, but Gary had very little production over his entire college career. Search for ways to excuse that, or whatever, but hes a gamble. Maybe it will pay off. Pettine is a very good coach, after all. 

Right now.  Fant right now is a better TE than Rashan Gary is at EDGE.  But they're two non-premium positions, and Gary has a higher floor.  IF both players hit, who has the bigger impact?  Gary.  Either way, I was arguing the notion that any of them were clearly superior prospects, which still hasn't been argued.  The crux of your entire argument is that Rashan Gary isn't very good because he didn't produce.  The reality is that he did produce it just didn't turn into sacks and TFL.  You can have an impact on a game without it actually showing up in the box scores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Right now.  Fant right now is a better TE than Rashan Gary is at EDGE.  But they're two non-premium positions, and Gary has a higher floor.  IF both players hit, who has the bigger impact?  Gary.  Either way, I was arguing the notion that any of them were clearly superior prospects, which still hasn't been argued.  The crux of your entire argument is that Rashan Gary isn't very good because he didn't produce.  The reality is that he did produce it just didn't turn into sacks and TFL.  You can have an impact on a game without it actually showing up in the box scores.

It's odd that it's boiled down to Fant, but that's fine. Fant has the potential to be an All-Pro. He's clearly a superior prospect to Gary, who hasn't produced. We're talking about the twelfth pick, with plenty of quality players available. A guy with athletic measurables but no real production shouldn't automatically jump to the forefront. But you'll continue to reach to prove it wasn't a mistake. Don't even know why I'm bothering to type this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Fant & Bradbury are both non-impact positions and frankly neither were top 10 talents in this draft anyways. We were able to solidify both of those positions with 2nd & 3rd round prospects that  are not rated that much lower than the two you have referenced. I do agree Rashan Gary is a huge risk as a pass rusher at this point but both Fant and Bradbury were never options at 12. This draft albeit deep did not have the QBs to push the blue chip talent down the boards like years past so the Packers gambled on a high upside player at a premium position vs a safe pick (I still don't think Fant is a safe pick, Bradbury is very safe IMO)  at a non - impact position. 

Sweat and Winovich were gambles, too. And may both end up being better than Gary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

It's odd that it's boiled down to Fant, but that's fine. Fant has the potential to be an All-Pro. He's clearly a superior prospect to Gary, who hasn't produced. We're talking about the twelfth pick, with plenty of quality players available. A guy with athletic measurables but no real production shouldn't automatically jump to the forefront. But you'll continue to reach to prove it wasn't a mistake. Don't even know why I'm bothering to type this. 

Yet...Noah Fant who according to YOU is clearly a superior prospect went 20th overall, while Rashan Gary the CLEARLY inferior prospect went 12th.  So either there are 7 GMs in between the Broncos and Packers pick that deserve to be fired for passing on Fant according to your logic.  Noah Fant wasn't even the most productive TE on his own team, yet you're ready to make excuses as to why Fant should be given the benefit of the doubt.  That screams groupthink.  Let's actually discuss Gary and his lack of production, and not just regurgitate what the talking heads have said.  Post a video and give us a solid breakdown of even a few minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Yet...Noah Fant who according to YOU is clearly a superior prospect went 20th overall, while Rashan Gary the CLEARLY inferior prospect went 12th.  So either there are 7 GMs in between the Broncos and Packers pick that deserve to be fired for passing on Fant according to your logic.  Noah Fant wasn't even the most productive TE on his own team, yet you're ready to make excuses as to why Fant should be given the benefit of the doubt.  That screams groupthink.  Let's actually discuss Gary and his lack of production, and not just regurgitate what the talking heads have said.  Post a video and give us a solid breakdown of even a few minutes.

Why? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get what GB did selecting Gary. He is a major boom or bust pick. GB made several solid signings to improve a defense that lacked real teeth. Amos gives them a consistent presence at S, both Preston and Za'Darius Smith are serious upgrades that also allow versatility for Pettine too. 

 

Those alone make the defense much more consistent and allows Pettine to be more creative than he was able to be last year. But there isn't a major playmaker in that FA class, there isn't a cornerstone player. So when the draft came around Gute went and got both Gary and Savage. 

 

Both are fantastic athletes and Gute is betting that Pettine can develop them. Savage gets to learn from being across from Amos, who is consistent and fundamentally sound. Gary gets to work with the Smiths, who again are solid but not elite athletes. If their Gary and Savage hone their skills then that, combined with their high end athleticism, gives GB two premier playmakers. It also further allows Pettine versatility and potential mismatches. 

 

I'm not a huge Gary fan but I don't think Gute was wrong for drafting him, he took the gamble that he felt GB needed to try and force the defense into a strength, and putting his faith in Pettine for their development. I hope it flops for obvious reasons, but as a fan of Pettine I don't necessarily think it is a bad gamble. It's like the Floyd pick was for us. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Yet...Noah Fant who according to YOU is clearly a superior prospect went 20th overall, while Rashan Gary the CLEARLY inferior prospect went 12th.  So either there are 7 GMs in between the Broncos and Packers pick that deserve to be fired for passing on Fant according to your logic.  Noah Fant wasn't even the most productive TE on his own team, yet you're ready to make excuses as to why Fant should be given the benefit of the doubt.  That screams groupthink.  Let's actually discuss Gary and his lack of production, and not just regurgitate what the talking heads have said.  Post a video and give us a solid breakdown of even a few minutes.

Yes he was

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess I'll toss in my nickel and get three cents change.

GB is seemingly in a position similar to where we were when we drafted Floyd.  We needed and OLB/Edge and he was the best available at that point and we even traded up to get him.  Floyd has never justified his draft status strictly as an Edge Rusher but he's still become a very good OLB.

Gary was GB's BPA at that point.  Like Floyd his athleticism is his strong point so you gamble some on his upside because you had a need at his position and he was the top guy on your board.  Some of those picks become eventual winners, some don't, and some are full on busts.

If a team is sticking with a BPA methodology I don't think it's up to us to criticize the pick but we can always question it and critique it vs what might have been done instead.  So I get the pick but I'm also a bit surprised that if they were gonna reach a bit that it wasn't for Fant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sugashane said:

I'm not a huge Gary fan but I don't think Gute was wrong for drafting him, he took the gamble that he felt GB needed to try and force the defense into a strength, and putting his faith in Pettine for their development. I hope it flops for obvious reasons, but as a fan of Pettine I don't necessarily think it is a bad gamble. It's like the Floyd pick was for us. 

Except Floyd had 17 sacks in three seasons, and Gary had 9.5. 

1 hour ago, soulman said:

Gary was GB's BPA at that point.  Like Floyd his athleticism is his strong point so you gamble some on his upside because you had a need at his position and he was the top guy on your board.  Some of those picks become eventual winners, some don't, and some are full on busts.

If a team is sticking with a BPA methodology I don't think it's up to us to criticize the pick but we can always question it and critique it vs what might have been done instead.  So I get the pick but I'm also a bit surprised that if they were gonna reach a bit that it wasn't for Fant.

My point is that he was Green Bay's BPA based solely on athletic measurables and overall potential. That should be the sort of reasoning guiding your drafting in later rounds, not with the twelfth overall pick. Fant wouldn't have been a reach at twelve anyway (not would some of the other guys I mentioned). Fant would have been the first TE off the board if Hockenson hadn't declared. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

Except Floyd had 17 sacks in three seasons, and Gary had 9.5. 

My point is that he was Green Bay's BPA based solely on athletic measurables and overall potential. That should be the sort of reasoning guiding your drafting in later rounds, not with the twelfth overall pick. Fant wouldn't have been a reach at twelve anyway (not would some of the other guys I mentioned). Fant would have been the first TE off the board if Hockenson hadn't declared. 

It really doesn't matter how GB determines it.  If that's what they go by then it is what it is and if we disagree it's only our own opinion.  Not gospel.

I felt they would take Fant there as well so we were both wrong along with a whole lot of others.  And if they ranked their need at Edge above their need at TE it makes sense to them even if it doesn't to the rest of us.

Why do some women date and marry the guys they do and vice versa.  Why do I value certain guitars and basses over others.  Reasoning can often be very complex but in the end it all comes down to preference and GB preferred Gary to Fant at that pick.  I kind of ends with that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, soulman said:

Why do some women date and marry the guys they do and vice versa.  Why do I value certain guitars and basses over others.  Reasoning can often be very complex but in the end it all comes down to preference and GB preferred Gary to Fant at that pick.  I kind of ends with that.

Sure. I simply think they got it wrong, is all. :D I didn't put a lot of thought into who they should pick, but figured an offensive lineman was a good option. The good news for Green Bay fans is that while the pick is terrible, and obviously a gamble, it isn't a flat-out mistake.  Like Curtis Enis. Or trading the twelfth pick for Rick Mirer. (Moves I disliked at the time, by the way.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

Yes he was

No he wasnt.  He might be the best pro, and that's where I'd put my money, but Hock was the more productive Hawkeye. People are comparing Hock to Gronk, and Hock isnt Gronk, he might be Todd Heap tho, which is still really good.  I think Fant is more in line with Gates.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

Sure. I simply think they got it wrong, is all. :D I didn't put a lot of thought into who they should pick, but figured an offensive lineman was a good option. The good news for Green Bay fans is that while the pick is terrible, and obviously a gamble, it isn't a flat-out mistake.  Like Curtis Enis. Or trading the twelfth pick for Rick Mirer. (Moves I disliked at the time, by the way.) 

Oh hell, don't remind me.  Enis sucked but I think Cade McClown was even worse.  Going back to the Mikey McCaskey era unearths so any WTF moves it's really easy to see why the old man never wanted him even near his team let alone running it.  Ginny should be tarred and feathered over that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Superman(DH23) said:

No he wasnt.  He might be the best pro, and that's where I'd put my money, but Hock was the more productive Hawkeye. People are comparing Hock to Gronk, and Hock isnt Gronk, he might be Todd Heap tho, which is still really good.  I think Fant is more in line with Gates.  

Had Ferentz not tweaked the playing time, Fant would have had more yards. They're both really good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...