I'm trying to understand why we are still mocking edge rushers.

[PACKRULE]

23 minutes ago, Cadmus said:

What are you talking about? 

That's not even close to relevant to what I was talking about. 

Ok sounded like it was but whatever. Draft d early and often. That’s all I care about. A top 5 D. 

[JaireAlex]

8 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Never said that. My stance has been pretty damn clear since the draft talk started. 

For the health of the thread - I'll just leave it at that.

Well I actually repeat what I wrote two or three times and still you can't get it right. Sorry if I missed your "stance" 200 pages ago.

[Dubz41]

Here's a decent perspective from JS online.  Hopefully it more eloquently argues why some of us think Edge is the way to go at #12.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/dougherty/2019/04/11/dougherty-trio-edge-rushers-who-could-tempt-packers-no-12/3438421002/

One more point- no one knows what Gute is thinking.  One year is not enough to assume any kind of behavioral pattern.

[vegas492]

15 hours ago, PACKRULE said:

Fackerell sucks sorry everyone knows it he's not even a good 3. He lucked into his sacks. If we want a good D draft it heavy and hard. D wins championships.

Look.  I don't even like Fackrell much, but he doesn't "suck" anymore.  You don't simply "luck" into double digit sacks.  He had a great game sacking Russell Wilson, who is very, very hard to get down.  You don't "luck" into sacking Wilson.  He makes you earn them, even if unblocked.

Told you, I'm no Fackrell fan, but there were a few times last year when I saw him set up moves and execute a few moves nicely.  Spins while slapping hands off of him.  Head and shoulder fakes.  I think he's a case of a kid who did suck, but who also spent a lot of time taking to coaching.  I give him credit for that.  He also showed decent drop ability last year.  With Pettine wanting to keep teams guessing as to who is coming and who is dropping, he is a nice piece to have.

With us signing the two Smiths, I can't help but feel that Fackrell will get another 5-8 sacks this year.  And when he does, that two years' worth of production will get him paid nicely in free agency.  We will know he isn't worth it, but still you need to give it to him for making himself into a better player.

[rcon14]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

Look.  I don't even like Fackrell much, but he doesn't "suck" anymore.  You don't simply "luck" into double digit sacks.  He had a great game sacking Russell Wilson, who is very, very hard to get down.  You don't "luck" into sacking Wilson.  He makes you earn them, even if unblocked.

Told you, I'm no Fackrell fan, but there were a few times last year when I saw him set up moves and execute a few moves nicely.  Spins while slapping hands off of him.  Head and shoulder fakes.  I think he's a case of a kid who did suck, but who also spent a lot of time taking to coaching.  I give him credit for that.  He also showed decent drop ability last year.  With Pettine wanting to keep teams guessing as to who is coming and who is dropping, he is a nice piece to have.

With us signing the two Smiths, I can't help but feel that Fackrell will get another 5-8 sacks this year.  And when he does, that two years' worth of production will get him paid nicely in free agency.  We will know he isn't worth it, but still you need to give it to him for making himself into a better player.

If you look at Fackrell's pressure numbers, which correlate to future sacks better than past sacks due, he's still EDGE4.

Kyler Fackrell had a sack on 48% of his pressures. The second highest in the entire league was 28%. The league average was 19%. Kyler had 26 pressures, which should have equated to about five sacks. And that was in 243 pass rushing snaps.

Fackrell isn't good and he did basically luck his way into double digit sacks. When this rate regresses to normalcy, Fackrell will return to EDGE4 status.

[Dubz41]

18 minutes ago, rcon14 said:

If you look at Fackrell's pressure numbers, which correlate to future sacks better than past sacks due, he's still EDGE4.

Kyler Fackrell had a sack on 48% of his pressures. The second highest in the entire league was 28%. The league average was 19%. Kyler had 26 pressures, which should have equated to about five sacks. And that was in 243 pass rushing snaps.

Fackrell isn't good and he did basically luck his way into double digit sacks. When this rate regresses to normalcy, Fackrell will return to EDGE4 status.

I think this shows how good Pettine is at scheming pass rush.  That's what I see with that statistical analysis.  When they schemed Fack- he finished it. 

I've always liked Fack, but agree that he is a #4 edge and that's why I want us to get another pass rusher.  If Pettine can squeeze double digit sacks from Fackrell, just think what he could do with a Burns/Sweat.

Bolded- Fack is okay to good, never very good or great.  You don't get 10+ sacks without being good.  His drop abilities are underrated.

[rcon14]

1 minute ago, Dubz41 said:

I think this shows how good Pettine is at scheming pass rush.  That's what I see with that statistical analysis.  When they schemed Fack- he finished it. 

I've always liked Fack, but agree that he is a #4 edge and that's why I want us to get another pass rusher.  If Pettine can squeeze double digit sacks from Fackrell, just think what he could do with a Burns/Sweat.

I don't think it says anything more than some crazy statistical outlier that is unlikely to repeat itself. It's like a baseball player hitting an obnoxious amount of seeing-eye singles. Yeah, it happened, but it isn't going to happen in the future and doesn't tell us anything about them.

[vegas492]

28 minutes ago, rcon14 said:

If you look at Fackrell's pressure numbers, which correlate to future sacks better than past sacks due, he's still EDGE4.

Kyler Fackrell had a sack on 48% of his pressures. The second highest in the entire league was 28%. The league average was 19%. Kyler had 26 pressures, which should have equated to about five sacks. And that was in 243 pass rushing snaps.

Fackrell isn't good and he did basically luck his way into double digit sacks. When this rate regresses to normalcy, Fackrell will return to EDGE4 status.

From what I saw, Fackrell was schemed into making some plays, but still, he had to get the QB down.  I'll maintain that you don't "luck" into sacking the elusive Russell Wilson 3 times.  You can luck into their backfield plenty, but getting Wilson to the ground isn't easy, even if he doesn't see you coming.

No doubt about the pressures and sack totals.  Very much get it.  My main point is that Fackrell doesn't flat out "suck" anymore.  I'd put him squarely into the "okay" category.

He's going to see the field again this year.  With the 2 Smith's drawing attention, along with Clark/Daniels...etc., I can easily see him getting 5-8 more sacks.  He will have opportunity and he should draw less attention with those other guys on the field.  

[vegas492]

12 minutes ago, rcon14 said:

I don't think it says anything more than some crazy statistical outlier that is unlikely to repeat itself. It's like a baseball player hitting an obnoxious amount of seeing-eye singles. Yeah, it happened, but it isn't going to happen in the future and doesn't tell us anything about them.

Agree that 10.5 sacks is an outlier.  Agree that he got there based a lot on scheme, but he still finished the plays.  He's okay.  He'll get a few more sacks this year, and end up leaving GB on a pretty nice contract.  We will all laugh about it and happily take a comp pick if the formula works.

EDIT:  And I cannot believe that I just typed 3 emails defending Fackrell.  It hurts too much to keep it going on any longer!

[rcon14]

1 minute ago, vegas492 said:

From what I saw, Fackrell was schemed into making some plays, but still, he had to get the QB down.  I'll maintain that you don't "luck" into sacking the elusive Russell Wilson 3 times.  You can luck into their backfield plenty, but getting Wilson to the ground isn't easy, even if he doesn't see you coming.

No doubt about the pressures and sack totals.  Very much get it.  My main point is that Fackrell doesn't flat out "suck" anymore.  I'd put him squarely into the "okay" category.

He's going to see the field again this year.  With the 2 Smith's drawing attention, along with Clark/Daniels...etc., I can easily see him getting 5-8 more sacks.  He will have opportunity and he should draw less attention with those other guys on the field.  

Nobody was ever double teaming Fackrell though, or even scheming for him. The extra "attention" going elsewhere was never going to Fackrell in the first place.

[rcon14]

Just now, vegas492 said:

Agree that 10.5 sacks is an outlier.  Agree that he got there based a lot on scheme, but he still finished the plays.  He's okay.  He'll get a few more sacks this year, and end up leaving GB on a pretty nice contract.  We will all laugh about it and happily take a comp pick if the formula works.

I hope this is exactly what happens!

[vegas492]

1 minute ago, rcon14 said:

I hope this is exactly what happens!

Has to happen, right?

Let's play "what if" (BTW...no longer defending Fackrell).  But...what if he gets 10 sacks.  20.5 over the last two years.  That's gonna give him a super rich FA contract, one that we will simply avoid.

What if he gets 1 or two sacks?  11.5 or 12.5 over two seasons.  We just paid two guys a lot of money for that kind of 2 year production.  We aren't doing it again.

I don't see how he ends up back in GB after this season.  Boom or bust, I think this is his last year.

[rcon14]

Just now, vegas492 said:

Has to happen, right?

Let's play "what if" (BTW...no longer defending Fackrell).  But...what if he gets 10 sacks.  20.5 over the last two years.  That's gonna give him a super rich FA contract, one that we will simply avoid.

What if he gets 1 or two sacks?  11.5 or 12.5 over two seasons.  We just paid two guys a lot of money for that kind of 2 year production.  We aren't doing it again.

I don't see how he ends up back in GB after this season.  Boom or bust, I think this is his last year.

100%

[vegas492]

5 minutes ago, rcon14 said:

Nobody was ever double teaming Fackrell though, or even scheming for him. The extra "attention" going elsewhere was never going to Fackrell in the first place.

Going from memory here....I thought I saw/read somewhere where a reporter said that teams were scheming more for Fack and giving less attention to Matthews.  In the "for whatever that is worth" category.  I don't really know as I didn't pay that much attention to him towards the end.

[PossibleCabbage]

I mean, here's the truth of the NFL: No matter how many quality pass rushers you have on your roster, this is not a position that you completely write off at any point in the draft.

Like put Aaron Donald, Khalil Mack, Von Miller, Cam Jordan, and Joey Bosa on this team, I'd still take a look at this draft and think "yeah, Ed Oliver, Montez Sweat, and Brian Burns are guys I'd like at 12."

When building a football team "creating or doubling down on a strength" is just as valid as "fixing a weakness" provided that the strength is a useful one, like pass rush.