Jump to content
CWood21

2020 NFL Draft Discussion

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, incognito_man said:

top 10 average WR: $16 million
top 10 average G: $11.7 million
 

Appears NFL teams value WRs approximately 36% more than guards.

I'd think the median salary paid to WRs and Gs would probably be a better measurement of how they are valued overall.

I don't have that info or know if it's readily available.

I'm not surprised "elite" WRs are monetarily valued more than "elite" Gs but I'd expect the "average" players at those position to be much closer in compensation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SAM said:

All i'm saying is WR or CB have more value than G or C. Still not sure  who will be the Slot, and King's health is in question. Greedy Williams was on the board as well as  some big fast WR like AJ Brown, Parris Campbell, and DK Metcalf. If they picked a LT that would be different. 

If we’re going in on giving us the best chance to win during Rodgers’ twilight years. Offensive line is the smart play. Receivers aren’t typically difference makers during years 1&2 and a lot of arguments can be made that great QB’s don’t need an elite receiver corps to win, but what they do need is time in the pocket. Keep Rodgers upright, prolong his health, establish a running attack, keep play calls not overly predictable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 5:15 PM, SAM said:

IMHO GB should have taken a skill player at #44 instead of an interior linemen. 

We drafted Sternberger in the next round.  the tight end prospects that were better than him were already gone by #44.   

 We drafted the WR position last year, and the RB position 2 years ago.   At some point you have to let these guys develop.   Do you really believe that any of the 2nd round WR will offer something our 3 draft picks from last years draft cannot?

Fix the OL, and get the same level skilled position player later.  What's wrong with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There are so many questions with so many young players on the Packers that talking about the 2020 draft in any other fashion other than talent available is fools gold. We could be in the market for any position on the team. Also, any position could be considered a strength if a few young guys develop. 

The one that seems a certainty to me is OT. Bulaga is almost certainly gone and there is nothing to count on behind him.

Edited by Golfman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wgbeethree said:

I'd think the median salary paid to WRs and Gs would probably be a better measurement of how they are valued overall.

I don't have that info or know if it's readily available.

I'm not surprised "elite" WRs are monetarily valued more than "elite" Gs but I'd expect the "average" players at those position to be much closer in compensation. 

Well of course. That would be true for virtually every position but QB since most players make less than $5million/year. The average player at every position is probably nearly identical in salary I'd suspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2019 at 6:15 PM, SAM said:

IMHO GB should have taken a skill player at #44 instead of an interior linemen. 

It's a fair and logical stance, but when you're talking about a versatile OL that quietly became a spectacular prospect, you have to pull the trigger; especially given the hole we've had at RG the past two years and the overall instability of that side of the OL. Sternberger at 75 was beyond predictable. 

I rolled my eyes harder than ever before listening to McShay and Kiper drone on about "getting Aaron weapons" this year when those weapons mean next to nothing if we're not winning the war in the trenches.

12 hours ago, SAM said:

All i'm saying is WR or CB have more value than G or C. Still not sure  who will be the Slot, and King's health is in question. Greedy Williams was on the board as well as  some big fast WR like AJ Brown, Parris Campbell, and DK Metcalf. If they picked a LT that would be different. 

I was in Boston the week before the draft and listened to one of the local yokel radio guys who literally said that DK Metcalf's hips were that of a 90 year old woman's. Campbell would've been a nice pick and would've been a better pick than Brown; but why go WR when you have a full room at the position as is? Reality showed up with that position recently when MLF basically disregarded the slot WR position favoring the concept of every receiver understanding that role within the offense. Also, there's a reason Greedy Williams fell...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/24/2019 at 10:16 PM, Joe said:

It's a fair and logical stance, but when you're talking about a versatile OL that quietly became a spectacular prospect, you have to pull the trigger; especially given the hole we've had at RG the past two years and the overall instability of that side of the OL. Sternberger at 75 was beyond predictable. 

I rolled my eyes harder than ever before listening to McShay and Kiper drone on about "getting Aaron weapons" this year when those weapons mean next to nothing if we're not winning the war in the trenches.

I was in Boston the week before the draft and listened to one of the local yokel radio guys who literally said that DK Metcalf's hips were that of a 90 year old woman's. Campbell would've been a nice pick and would've been a better pick than Brown; but why go WR when you have a full room at the position as is? Reality showed up with that position recently when MLF basically disregarded the slot WR position favoring the concept of every receiver understanding that role within the offense. Also, there's a reason Greedy Williams fell...

This is true, but often those guys that fall make impacts and in hindsight GMs were wrong to pass them up. One that comes to mind is the Honey Badger. There are countless others as well. 

That is not to say they always work out when they fall despite what us 'experts' think. Some do bust. I"m putting Greedy in the category of one that will succeed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, the thing about "IOL vs. WR" in the draft is also somewhat tied to "what helps your QB more" in addition to salaries.  It's not hard to see that Rodgers' best years were when he had really good interior OL play and some of his recent issues can be somewhat linked to "interior pressure".   Which is to say the WR would be dependent on Rodgers, and Rodgers is somewhat dependent on the OL.  So if there's an issue with the OL, you fix that first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Golfman said:

This is true, but often those guys that fall make impacts and in hindsight GMs were wrong to pass them up. One that comes to mind is the Honey Badger. There are countless others as well. 

That is not to say they always work out when they fall despite what us 'experts' think. Some do bust. I"m putting Greedy in the category of one that will succeed. 

I can respect that, but Honey Badger fell due to off-the-field issues. Greedy fell due to play concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2019 at 4:01 PM, SAM said:

All I'm saying is when GB picked Jenkins, a Center, at #44, A.J. Brown, Parris Campbell, and DK Metcalf were on the Board. All three were highly productive in Collige, and Freekish big Athletes for WR..

I wouldn't necessarily jump to the conclusion that the Packers value IOL more than WR.  It could have easily been the fact that the Packers are confident in their young WRs moreso than their current IOL options.  I mean, Lane Taylor isn't anything more than an average starting guard and Billy Turner hasn't been anything special as a pro.  I'm not sure labeling them anything more than average is fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Fans are still on the WR kick ? 

Gute & Co. spent a full year or more looking at, scouting, investigating, drafting, teaching, and paying 3 guys from last years draft for good reason.  They aren't going to just give up on them after 12 months. Literally every single draft pick and FA signing were at positions of much greater need. Should we have cut Adams after 12 months ?  How can this argument still be going on ?

Edited by cannondale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CWood21 said:

I wouldn't necessarily jump to the conclusion that the Packers value IOL more than WR.  It could have easily been the fact that the Packers are confident in their young WRs moreso than their current IOL options.  I mean, Lane Taylor isn't anything more than an average starting guard and Billy Turner hasn't been anything special as a pro.  I'm not sure labeling them anything more than average is fair.

I remember people clamoring for Taylor to be cut several times, only to emerge as a serviceable starter. I wasn't a fan of the Jenkins pick either, but only because I felt DL was a greater need at the time. Jenkins SHOULD be able to provide the stability we've sorely lacked on the right side of the OL the last three years.

 

1 hour ago, cannondale said:

Fans are still on the WR kick ? 

Gute & Co. spent a full year or more looking at, scouting, investigating, drafting, teaching, and paying 3 guys from last years draft for good reason.  They aren't going to just give up on them after 12 months. Literally every single draft pick and FA signing were at positions of much greater need. Should we have cut Adams after 12 months ?  How can this argument still be going on ?

This...all of it. We made an investment on those guys and so far we've had a potentially redeemable guy, a guy that looked average, and a guy that flashed a lot of upside and then disappeared down the stretch.

Pump the brakes, folks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/24/2019 at 2:06 PM, hitnhope said:

We drafted Sternberger in the next round.  the tight end prospects that were better than him were already gone by #44.   

 We drafted the WR position last year, and the RB position 2 years ago.   At some point you have to let these guys develop.   Do you really believe that any of the 2nd round WR will offer something our 3 draft picks from last years draft cannot?

Fix the OL, and get the same level skilled position player later.  What's wrong with that?

GB has been good taking WR and RB in rounnd 2, Jennings, Nelson, Adams, and Remember Eddy Lacy was OROY. The Pack has been good at picking good OL in the 4 and later rounds like . Lang, Sutton, Bakhtiari, Langford

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SAM said:

GB has been good taking WR and RB in rounnd 2, Jennings, Nelson, Adams, and Remember Eddy Lacy was OROY. The Pack has been good at picking good OL in the 4 and later rounds like . Lang, Sutton, Bakhtiari, Langford

Langford?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SAM said:

GB has been good taking WR and RB in rounnd 2, Jennings, Nelson, Adams, and Remember Eddy Lacy was OROY. The Pack has been good at picking good OL in the 4 and later rounds like . Lang, Sutton, Bakhtiari, Langford

Those were all great picks - except for Langford; I’ll go to my grave saying that he was the worst Thompson pick by a mile.

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



×