Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
FinneasGage

rank the roster: 2019 edition (#18) (complete)

who's the 18th best player on the packers?   

45 members have voted

  1. 1. who's the 18th best player on the packers?

    • Jamal Williams
    • Geronimo Allison
    • Marquez Valdes-Scantling
    • Equanimeous St. Brown
      0
    • Jace Sternberger
      0
    • Marcedes Lewis
      0
    • Elgton Jenkins
      0
    • Billy Turner
    • Lane Taylor
    • Jason Spriggs
      0
    • Dean Lowry
      0
    • Tyler Lancaster
      0
    • Montravius Adams
      0
    • Kyler Fackrell
    • Reggie Gilbert
    • Oren Burks
      0
    • Josh Jones
      0
    • Tony Brown
      0
    • Josh Jackson
    • Tramon Williams


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, wgbeethree said:

Some numbers to show just what an anomaly Fackrells stats were.

.....

22 players had double digit sacks last year....

Fackrell ranked 22nd out of them (not surprising as he was 21st in sacks) in QB hits with 12 (T-70th in the league). The next lowest was 18 (T-33rd).

Fackrell ranked  1st in % of sacks to QB hits at 88%. Only two others were >70%. The average was 54%.

If he was getting sacks to QB hits at the "average" rate of the double digit sackers he should have been expected to have ~6.5 sacks.

As far as I can tell in the last decade only two players hit double digit sacks with 12 or fewer QB hits. Willie Young got 10 on 10 in 2014. James Hall had 10.5 on 12 in 2010. (They had Robert Mathis having 11.5 sacks on 10 QB hits in 2008 which is clearly an error as it's the only example I saw of more sacks than QB hits.)

....

9 other players finished last season with 12 QB hits. Those players averaged 5.2 sacks.

....

Based on his QB hits last season he would be expected to have ~6 sacks.

....

Whether that's extremely impressive or extremely flukey is up for debate.

 

So basically when he got there, he got home, but he didn't get there that much.

Edited by Gopackgonerd

Share this post


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

That’s not saying much. He’s not bad, but I’m just not sure he’ll get as many snaps. Regardless of how well they play, rookie edge players drafted in the top-16 typically get around 600 snaps. When you combine that with the addition of the Smiths, idk how Fackrell could avoid a reduction in snaps. Unless there are injuries or they give him some ILB snaps (that’s where a lot of Matthews’ snaps came from when they had Peppers).

 

Considering people have ranked 5 players from last year ahead of him, I'd say it is saying something. King shouldn't have been rated above him (he's an injury away from getting replaced). Daniels after last year shouldn't have been.

I don't think 600-700 snaps for Fackrell next year is out of the question (Reggie Gilbert got almost 500 last year...).  Gary is the ultimate project and won't be rushed into the lineup based on draft stock. We are going to be playing a lot of strange exotic fronts (Zsmith/Gary will play end more than you thing) and Fackrell is actually pretty fluid. He'll get some chances to rush inside and play more in space when we do like 2-4/3-3 looks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mvs dropping some knowledge on Davante...

“I think everybody’s rejuvenated a little bit,” wide receiver Davante Adams said. “Obviously, these past two seasons we really didn’t get it done the way we wanted to, so having a new staff come in it’s been a lot of fun. Getting to learn a new offense has been pretty challenging as well. As a vet now, going into year six, the offense was not easy but once you get settled in (there's) not as much studying needed and different things like that, so it’s challenging me to stay in my book. It’s a level playing field now. The young guys, they can teach me stuff. I may forget a thing that (Marquez Valdes-Scantling) will remember and he’ll let me know.
It’s fun. We all get to work together.”

wasn't MVS the guy who hand-wrote the playbook last year so he'd learn it faster ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Gopackgonerd said:

So basically when he got there, he got home, but he didn't get there that much.

Yes, at a pretty much unprecedented and therefore highly unlikely to be repeated rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

 

wasn't MVS the guy who hand-wrote the playbook last year so he'd learn it faster ?

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

Considering people have ranked 5 players from last year ahead of him, I'd say it is saying something. King shouldn't have been rated above him (he's an injury away from getting replaced). Daniels after last year shouldn't have been.

I don't think 600-700 snaps for Fackrell next year is out of the question (Reggie Gilbert got almost 500 last year...).  Gary is the ultimate project and won't be rushed into the lineup based on draft stock. We are going to be playing a lot of strange exotic fronts (Zsmith/Gary will play end more than you thing) and Fackrell is actually pretty fluid. He'll get some chances to rush inside and play more in space when we do like 2-4/3-3 looks

If you look at the snap distribution from last season for our top 4 it is:

Fackrell - 866

Matthews - 761

Gilbert - 712

Perry - 314

Just looking at the roster, it is pretty likely that Fackrell will see a lot of playing time again this season.  IF we play the same number of snaps, and each of Fackrell/Smith/Smith play 750 total  (top 3 avg 780 last season), there are 403 snaps left for Gilbert and Gary.

Share this post


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

Yea, because editting quotes is so respectful...

An innocuous edit to highlight the portion being responded to is not disrespectful. It's certainly not in the same hemisphere of "kindergarten logic".

Share this post


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

If you look at the snap distribution from last season for our top 4 it is:

Fackrell - 866

Matthews - 761

Gilbert - 712

Perry - 314

Just looking at the roster, it is pretty likely that Fackrell will see a lot of playing time again this season.  IF we play the same number of snaps, and each of Fackrell/Smith/Smith play 750 total  (top 3 avg 780 last season), there are 403 snaps left for Gilbert and Gary.

243 of those Fackrell snaps were on ST

5 of CM3's

226 of Gilbert's 

13 of Perry's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, SSG said:

243 of those Fackrell snaps were on ST

5 of CM3's

226 of Gilbert's 

13 of Perry's.

I was unaware.  Thanks.  Makes sense, I didn't think Gilbert played THAT much.  But still, there is room for Fackrell and Gary (and Gilbert) to play snaps on defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

I was unaware.  Thanks.  Makes sense, I didn't think Gilbert played THAT much.  But still, there is room for Fackrell and Gary (and Gilbert) to play snaps on defense.

Completely agree.  Maybe Fackrell sees less snaps but in running situations.  I  don't see any reason he's going to have fewer pass rushing opportunities.  Not convinced Gary is gonna play a ton this year and I think both the Smith's will see snaps on the DL in pass rushing situations.  I'm no Fackrell fan boy but he made a significant amount of improvement in year 3 so I wouldn't at all surprised to see even more this coming year.  

Edited by SSG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Through the first 8 games (prior to Perry's injury), Fackrell had 184 snaps out of 530 available, putting him on track for 369 total. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kepler said:

An innocuous edit to highlight the portion being responded to is not disrespectful. It's certainly not in the same hemisphere of "kindergarten logic".

You seem to be looking at the wrong post. I'm not talking about the initial quote. Here's how a respectful conversation goes: Person A says "I believe [thing]". Person B says "I disagree because X, Y, and Z". Person A: "Have you considered E, F, & G?" etc.

It should not take 2 posts of basically saying nothing except "you're wrong" with varying levels of snark until you start bothering to try and provide proofs to support your position. It comes across as trollish. Look, people can be snarky all they want, but they shouldn't complain when they get some back at them or quibble about the exchange ratio. 

 

Share this post


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

They had Robert Mathis having 11.5 sacks on 10 QB hits in 2008 which is clearly an error as it's the only example I saw of more sacks than QB hits

I don't know what website you're using but at least on PFR I think QB Hits don't include sacks, therefore you can have more sacks than QB hits. You can check this for example in Fackrell's 2018 game logs, or in Mack's. Both have games with >0 sacks and 0 QB Hits.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MackKh00/gamelog/2018/

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FackKy00/gamelog/2018/

Share this post


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

You seem to be looking at the wrong post. I'm not talking about the initial quote. Here's how a respectful conversation goes: Person A says "I believe [thing]". Person B says "I disagree because X, Y, and Z". Person A: "Have you considered E, F, & G?" etc.

It should not take 2 posts of basically saying nothing except "you're wrong" with varying levels of snark until you start bothering to try and provide proofs to support your position. It comes across as trollish. Look, people can be snarky all they want, but they shouldn't complain when they get some back at them or quibble about the exchange ratio. 

 

Last I looked I was being snarky, not insulting you. This conversation has gone on long enough, let's talk more about players.

Share this post


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

Completely agree.  Maybe Fackrell sees less snaps but in running situations.  I  don't see any reason he's going to have fewer pass rushing opportunities.  Not convinced Gary is gonna play a ton this year and I think both the Smith's will see snaps on the DL in pass rushing situations.  I'm no Fackrell fan boy but he made a significant amount of improvement in year 3 so I wouldn't at all surprised to see even more this coming year.  

He won on 20 pass rushing opportunities last year. There's no reason why he should get as many/more pass rushing opportunities this year unless Smith/Smith/Gary are injured.

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  



×