Your Packers Final Roster Predictions - 2020 Edition

[craig]

Thanks for discussion, beast.  Your thoughts are all reasonable, fun to discuss and think about guys.  

I think where I'm differing from you is in terms of roster construction and use of PS. 

• 1.  Practice squad guys can practice as much and as fully and develop as fully as on real roster. 
• 2.  They are always within one game of injury call-up.  If you're the #8-11 OL, and you're not on the active game-day roster anyway, neither your development nor your utility as injury-insurance differs whether you're at the back of the 53 or on the 12-man PS. 
• 3.  I'm kinda thinking of it more as a 65-man roster, instead of 53, in terms of development. 
• 4.  Practice squad doesn't count as service time towards free agency.  

My premise, for example, is that Dequoy is 100% safe to send to PS.  And that *if* he was to remain on 53, the likelihood that he'd play a defensive snap this season is remote.   There's probably no benefit in burning a 53-roster spot.  He's got measurables to perhaps become an excellent player someday.  But that day probably isn't this season. 

For any developmental guy, I'd like to develop him on PS, rather than unnecessarily utilizing cheap-club-controlled contract years on developmental bench-warming.  (Maybe I'm wrong on that, and parking a guy on PS doesn't really provide longer club-control later?) . 

For young guys, I'd ask two questions in deciding whether to 53-man or practice-squad them:  1.  Am I at real risk of losing them if I try to park them on PS (and would I mind if I did)?  2. Are they the next-man-up at their position?  For Dequoy, "no" and "no". 

On OL in general, I think they often carry quite a few between present next-man-up use, and/or perceived risk-of-getting-stolen concerns.  Maybe that applies again to each of Nijman, Light, Hanson, and Runyan, I don't know.  

For example, Hanson.  *Maybe* by end of camp they already see that he's better, quicker, more NFL-ready center than Patrick.  Having played 4 years of Pac10, he may already be much better equipped to play than Patrick, it's well possible.  But *IF* (hypothetically), they think they'd be more comfortable turning to Patrick this year than to rookie Hanson, and *IF* they think Hanson is at no risk of getting claimed elsewhere, then I think it might make sense to just PS him? 

beast, on Kumerow-EQ:  Heh heh, I read the flack you got for suggesting EQ isn't a lock, so I feel your pain!   . Personally I don't think he's a lock, and I think his upside perception on this board is variably inflated, perhaps wildly so.  I hope I'm wrong, and that he really does have a solid NFL future and that he'll turn into a very productive Packer.  My argument is simply that between EQ and Kumerow, it's at least plausible that MLF won't keep both, and might free up a 53-man spot that way.  

Obviously tightening numbers at OL or WR matters more if you love some guy(s) who are otherwise at risk.  I'm not sure that will be true with this roster.  We may not really9 have any trouble making cuts this camp.  Particularly if, as too often happens, injury (or Covid?) create some extra openings on the 53.  

[Beast]

39 minutes ago, craig said:

Thanks for discussion, beast.  Your thoughts are all reasonable, fun to discuss and think about guys.  

I think where I'm differing from you is in terms of roster construction and use of PS. 

• 1.  Practice squad guys can practice as much and as fully and develop as fully as on real roster. 
• 2.  They are always within one game of injury call-up.  If you're the #8-11 OL, and you're not on the active game-day roster anyway, neither your development nor your utility as injury-insurance differs whether you're at the back of the 53 or on the 12-man PS. 
• 3.  I'm kinda thinking of it more as a 65-man roster, instead of 53, in terms of development. 
• 4.  Practice squad doesn't count as service time towards free agency.  

My premise, for example, is that Dequoy is 100% safe to send to PS.  And that *if* he was to remain on 53, the likelihood that he'd play a defensive snap this season is remote.   There's probably no benefit in burning a 53-roster spot.  He's got measurables to perhaps become an excellent player someday.  But that day probably isn't this season. 

For any developmental guy, I'd like to develop him on PS, rather than unnecessarily utilizing cheap-club-controlled contract years on developmental bench-warming.  (Maybe I'm wrong on that, and parking a guy on PS doesn't really provide longer club-control later?) . 

For young guys, I'd ask two questions in deciding whether to 53-man or practice-squad them:  1.  Am I at real risk of losing them if I try to park them on PS (and would I mind if I did)?  2. Are they the next-man-up at their position?  For Dequoy, "no" and "no". 

On OL in general, I think they often carry quite a few between present next-man-up use, and/or perceived risk-of-getting-stolen concerns.  Maybe that applies again to each of Nijman, Light, Hanson, and Runyan, I don't know.  

Yes, I understand your concept, but I also understand the Packers concept.

Case and point, RB Dexter Williams, he clearly wasn't ready yet, needed more time developing and you'd put him on the practice squad, so he could do this, with concerned that another team might take him.

But that's not what the Packers did... they kept him as he has more future potential, and released the guy that's more prepared now but had less upside, and when they had RBs injuries, they grabbed the more more ready guy off the practice squad, and he played over Dexter even though Dexter made the 53 and he didn't.

In other words the Packers GM's actions disagree with your opinion on utility as injury-insurance differs not being different.

Because as you said, they're one call from being called up, but that's true for 31 being able to call them up too.

 

And I get it, you're hating on Dequoy chances to play on defense this year... but don't forget STs is a factor as well for those last spots and have you mentioned whom you would take instead? As it sounded like you're just taking the field in general. 

[craig]

Correct, I'm not really predicting a 53.  I'm taking the field vs Dequoy, yes.  But I don't really have a confident guess on who.  I'm predicting Boyle, Hester, probably Roberts (?), and BOTH Kumerow and EQ all making it ahead of Dequoy. If you want a secondary guy, I'd probably guess Ento ahead of Dequoy.  

Your point on Dexter last year is well taken; that was an interesting choice.  I think each is case-by-case.  Perhaps they thought he might play?  3rd RB often does, and given the frequency of injuries at RB, needing 3rd back is more common than needing 9th OL.  But maybe he didn't improve the way they'd hoped, so when they did need a back, they pulled from PS instead of just turning to Dexter?  Beats me.  Or perhaps they thought he was at risk of getting selected.  

I do agree with you:  they often keep guys they like, and do not expose them, even if they may be unlikely to play as rookies.  I think that's the don't-risk-losing-a-guy-you-like principle.   That might apply to Dequoy.  And sure ST factors too, as you note.  (Which is partly where I don't think 9th OL usually play ST.) . 

On Dequoy, I'm not "hating" on him.  At all.  I'm just objectively predicting that he won't play corner or safety for the Packers this season.  By the way, I'd love to be wrong, and have him make the team.  When a young guy unexpectedly makes the team, I *always* like it.  I figure that means they saw qualities they liked in practice, and think he looks promising enough to not want to risk losing him, even if he doesn't play this year.  Or if that were to happen with Dequoy, maybe keeping him would mean that he's just a natural, and just has the quicks and natural gift of mirroring.  That would be super awesome.  (But I'm just predicting it's too good to be true, and probably isn't true.)  

[Beast]

Beats you? I thought I gave you the answer, they keep guys with potential that they like on the 53 so that other teams can't take them... that's what happens with a few spots at the end of the roster, they'll keep guys with more potential, so the team can develop them without having to worry about losing them via other teams signing them. That's why they kept Dexter Williams. Not because they thought he was currently the 3rd RB but if you can develop his potential his potential was the 3rd RB.

So you have to project some with potential, like they probably would of worked hard to keep St. Brown around as well, though he clearly was out played in preseason games.

But yes, I think every team (or almost every team) will keep at least 6 CBs.

I'm not saying Dequoy will get on the field with the defense. I think potential and STs will be most likely be the reasons.

[craig]

9 hours ago, Beast said:

Beats you? I thought I gave you the answer, they keep guys with potential that they like on the 53 so that other teams can't take them... that's what happens with a few spots at the end of the roster, they'll keep guys with more potential, so the team can develop them without having to worry about losing them via other teams signing them. That's why they kept Dexter Williams. Not because they thought he was currently the 3rd RB but if you can develop his potential his potential was the 3rd RB.....

I agree completely on this (and said so in earlier post).  "So that other teams can't take them."  Part of that is evaluation of whether other teams might take them.  In Dexter's case, they evidently thought that might happen (and given the injury frequency at RB around the league, perhaps for good reason.)  My guess is that Dequoy has negligible such risk, but I may be wrong on that.  I assume the team doesn't want to get too clever.  If a guy is seriously talented and has serious potential, don't get too cute with "but other teams won't realize that, so we can expose him."  But I do think that this summer of all summers, that the ability of other teams to gain any additional scouting info on our guys is probably slimmer than ever, so I expect that poaching from other teams will happen less than ever.   

I imagine that Josh Hansen has an excellent opportunity to earn a roster spot.  Patrick has done some Packers practice at center, but his actual game experience at center is very minimal.  In terms of actual tools to be Linsley's successor, Hansen may simply have more of them.  Centers are in finite supply around the league; so I think there's non-trivial risk that some team might grab him if they tried to expose him to practice squad.  

 

[Beast]

49 minutes ago, craig said:

I agree completely on this (and said so in earlier post).  "So that other teams can't take them."  Part of that is evaluation of whether other teams might take them.  In Dexter's case, they evidently thought that might happen (and given the injury frequency at RB around the league, perhaps for good reason.)  My guess is that Dequoy has negligible such risk, but I may be wrong on that.  I assume the team doesn't want to get too clever.  If a guy is seriously talented and has serious potential, don't get too cute with "but other teams won't realize that, so we can expose him."  But I do think that this summer of all summers, that the ability of other teams to gain any additional scouting info on our guys is probably slimmer than ever, so I expect that poaching from other teams will happen less than ever.   

I imagine that Josh Hansen has an excellent opportunity to earn a roster spot.  Patrick has done some Packers practice at center, but his actual game experience at center is very minimal.  In terms of actual tools to be Linsley's successor, Hansen may simply have more of them.  Centers are in finite supply around the league; so I think there's non-trivial risk that some team might grab him if they tried to expose him to practice squad.  

 

Yeah I thought you made a great point about teams might not be as interested in bring a lot of.outside guys in, or might want to see what they got first. But some teams also seem to be able to see a couple days of a guy and feel they know enough to pull a trigger.

What I find interesting, is they might have to make a decision on Williams, Williams or Ervin, as it might be hard to keep 5 RBs, though I have floated the idea of counting Ervin as a speed WR since he was being used more as a gadget WR towards the end of the season. But then other positions would be tight.

Jake Hansen vs Patrick might be interesting, I think the Packers are going to want to keep both as Linsley might be gone next year, but they might not be keep both on the 53, how to best play that, especially if they both look better than the backup OTs. Also, whom else can play Center? Jenkins did in college, but you want that potential at starting OG. Runyan says he can, maybe Taylor?

[craig]

Couple thoughts:

1. Whether you list Ervin as RB or WR, I don't think it matters.  He's a gadget guy, ST guy.  Don't think what you list him at would have any impact on whether they carry 5 vs 6 other WR, or whether they carry 3 or 4 other RB.
2. A new thing with PS this year is that you can use two spots for experienced guys.  Patrick, Kumerow, ESB, Dexter, Tim Williams, any of those guys are eligible for those two spots, even guys who in past I'd have thought were too experienced.  Not suggesting it's likely, but *if* they hypothetically wanted to keep both Hansen and Patrick, didn't want to expose Hansen, but didn't want to carry both, they hypothetically could offer Patrick a ST spot.  (Heh heh, can you imagine the board if the Packers stored Kumerow on the practice squad?  Or funnier yet, if they kept Kumerow and cut ESB; then ESB cleared and ended up on practice squad?) . 
3. I'm not sure whether Dexter raised his stock with the Packers, or in the league, over the course of the season.  I was surprised they kept him last fall, but it's possible that if his level of professionalism and blocking hasn't developed, I wonder if he might not be a guy they'd be willing to expose?  For example, maybe they'd prefer to keep him on PS; but *if* some team unexpectedly snags him,  it's not like he's probably viewed as all that irreplaceable?  Yes, you'd prefer to keep and hopefully have him emerge as a cheapo-version of Jones lite.    But it's also possible that he's a bubbly RB who's pretty interchangable with 50 other fringe backs?
4. I'd be shocked if they cut Jamaal in order to keep Dexter, barring injury.  But yeah, Dexter looks to have an uphill battle to try to make it.
5. I've been thinking OL might be tighter than some projections.  But it is possible that they will keep as many as 10.  Taylor; Patrick is experienced at both C and G, has a 2-year deal, might perhaps have a future post-Linsley, and with his 2-position capacity is kind of a nice game-day guy to carry; probably want some backup T, so between Light and Nijman they might want one if not both, and perhaps they like both as potential core players in a post Wagner or post Bakhti world (I'd love to hear some positive buzz about the monster Nijman emerging as a serious talent, for example, that would be really fun....); and who knows whether they like Hansen and/or Runyan too much to expose either one.  Heh heh, maybe keep all 11!  :):)

Edited July 9, 2020 by craig

[ThatJerkDave]

A few thoughts on the current discussion.  I won't make a prediction until I see something, really anything.

1.  At RB we have 2 stone cold locks, with Aaron Jones and AJ Dillon.  Jamaal Williams has also been very productive when given the chance.  Making the squad as a 4th RB is going to be very, very tough.  There are good things on college tape from Damarea Crockett, Patrick Taylor, and Dexter Williams.  If it were me, I would risk all three of these guys to the PS this season.  I don't believe that any of the three would be better than either Jamaal or AJ this season, and it should be pretty likely that we can keep at least one of them on the practice squad.

2.  Ervin will be our offensive special teams guy.  He is a returner, and a gadget player on offense, I think he is also on coverage units for STs.  Count him as WR or RB, doesn't really matter.  He probably makes the squad, and if we are just going by numbers, it is probably in lieu of a WR.  He takes the Jeff Janis/Trevor Davis roster spot.  I also really think that Vernon Scott will make the team because of special teams play.  

3. CB.  We really only have two locks for roster spots: Alexander and King.  If I were only allowed to take 4 CBs, my choices right now are Alexander, King, Sullivan and Hollman.  Last season they kept 7 CBs on the week 1 roster, but Pettine seems to like the third safety on his defense.  Raven Greene and Will Redmond both played that extra DB last season, and both are back.  Much like the RB situation, I don't know that any of: Amos, Dequoy, Ento, Hollman, Jackson, Samules, or Sunderland have really separated themselves or shown that they are a must have for the roster.  Dequoy is an interesting piece of clay.  But the little video that I saw of him looked like a high school level team, and he didn't even really stand out all that much.

4.  Lucas Patrick vs Jake Hanson.  I think that both make the team.  Linsley is the starting center.  Hanson is the starter in waiting, but a healthy scratch.  Patrick is a back-up at both guard and center, and active on game day.  I do think we have an embarrassment of riches at interior offensive line.  But I don't think they would pay Patrick only to cut him immediately.  Also, to play the same game we have with RB and CB, what is the difference between Jon Runyan, Simon Stepaniak, and Zack Johnson?  Do we mind losing one if we can keep the other two on the PS?

5.  And I wouldn't be a complete jerk if I didn't ask this...  If Jake Kumerow wasn't our oldest WR, would we be more open to him beating EQ, MVS, or Tonyan for a roster spot?

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, ThatJerkDave said:

1.  At RB we have 2 stone cold locks, with Aaron Jones and AJ Dillon.  Jamaal Williams has also been very productive when given the chance.  Making the squad as a 4th RB is going to be very, very tough.  There are good things on college tape from Damarea Crockett, Patrick Taylor, and Dexter Williams.  If it were me, I would risk all three of these guys to the PS this season.  I don't believe that any of the three would be better than either Jamaal or AJ this season, and it should be pretty likely that we can keep at least one of them on the practice squad.

Have we ever carried 4 RBs?  I'm not talking about RB/FB tweeners, I'm talking about four traditional RBs.  At this point, I can't envision a scenario in which the Packers carry 4 RBs on their roster next year.

 

1 hour ago, ThatJerkDave said:

4.  Lucas Patrick vs Jake Hanson.  I think that both make the team.  Linsley is the starting center.  Hanson is the starter in waiting, but a healthy scratch.  Patrick is a back-up at both guard and center, and active on game day.  I do think we have an embarrassment of riches at interior offensive line.  But I don't think they would pay Patrick only to cut him immediately.  Also, to play the same game we have with RB and CB, what is the difference between Jon Runyan, Simon Stepaniak, and Zack Johnson?  Do we mind losing one if we can keep the other two on the PS?

I think Lucas Patrick' extension makes him a virtual lock for the roster.

[vegas492]

9 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Have we ever carried 4 RBs?  I'm not talking about RB/FB tweeners, I'm talking about four traditional RBs.  At this point, I can't envision a scenario in which the Packers carry 4 RBs on their roster next year.

Do you consider Ervin a RB or ST?

I think that is how to you get to 4, if you count Ervin as a RB.  

[ThatJerkDave]

8 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Have we ever carried 4 RBs?  I'm not talking about RB/FB tweeners, I'm talking about four traditional RBs.  At this point, I can't envision a scenario in which the Packers carry 4 RBs on their roster next year.

 

I think Lucas Patrick' extension makes him a virtual lock for the roster.

Since Thompson took over for Sherman, I don't think that we have kept four RBs (though in that Samkon Gado year, I think we had like 5 different starters).  I do think this is the year though, but that depends on how much you can call Tyler Ervin a RB.  I just don't see how any of Crockett, Taylor, or Dexter Williams, will be better than Jamaal Williams right now.  And I think that is their only way to make the team.  2021 I think will be AJ Dillon and an all new cast.  Perhaps that comes from the current PS candidates, perhaps not.

 

I think the same about the Lucas Patrick extension as well.  But that is why the 3 interior OL in the draft really confused me, and still confuses me.  We just drafted Jenkins, LG is set for years.  We just signed Patrick and Turner, and retained Taylor, then we bring in 3 draft picks and IMO a pretty impressive FA G, in Zack Johnson.  I expected to have Hanson vs Patrick for center battle next offseason.  But it looks like this season sees 6 guys competing for the RG spot, which already has a pretty decent player with a high salary occupying the position.  I like Patrick as the all-purpose interior sub, who can play any of the 3 spots if need be.  But that still leaves: Johnson, Runyan, Stepaniak, and Taylor.  I get the "o-line shuffle" with Turner going to tackle, etc.  But IMO that still puts Patrick in as the 3rd guard that is active on game day.  I just can't wrap my head around this one.  And for the record, I don't dislike any of these players.

[Brat&Beer]

I've been trying to find a way to keep Dexter Williams without cutting or trading Jamaal Williams. DW is the RB on this team with the best skills to replace Aaron Jones if/when he leaves in FA. DW is a talented but sometimes unreliable guy. His 2018 season at Notre Dame was typical. He was suspended the first 4 games, but when he came back was fantastic. Had over 1100 total yards and 13 TD's. Last year frustrated the Packers coaches by sometimes seeming to not know his assignments. He's a guy who could pay big dividends if you can get him to take his profession seriously. 

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

Do you consider Ervin a RB or ST?

I think that is how to you get to 4, if you count Ervin as a RB.  

ST tbh.  Although, I don't think we've ever carried a pure ST player that wasn't a K, P, or LS either.  He's a RB/WR/ST player.  I was speaking more in terms of traditional RBs.

[Shanedorf]

10 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Have we ever carried 4 RBs?

Has Matt LaFleur ever coached this team before ? I don't believe so.
When talking about RBs, MLF clearly stated he wants more and its Gute's job to give him what he wants. Hence the draft of Dillon.
Tyler Ervin is listed as an RB on the official roster, so he's an RB for the purposes of this discussion and Deguara is listed as a TE

Aaron Jones, Jamaal Williams, AJ Dillion, Tyler Ervin. I'll bet 100 incog points all 4 of those guys are on the 53.

[CWood21]

59 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

Since Thompson took over for Sherman, I don't think that we have kept four RBs (though in that Samkon Gado year, I think we had like 5 different starters).  I do think this is the year though, but that depends on how much you can call Tyler Ervin a RB.  I just don't see how any of Crockett, Taylor, or Dexter Williams, will be better than Jamaal Williams right now.  And I think that is their only way to make the team.  2021 I think will be AJ Dillon and an all new cast.  Perhaps that comes from the current PS candidates, perhaps not.

The only time I thought we might have kept 4 RBs was in 2007 when the Packers took 2 RBs in the draft.  We've been pretty religious in that we roster 3 RBs, although I believe we had one year where we only carried 2 RBs.

1 hour ago, ThatJerkDave said:

I think the same about the Lucas Patrick extension as well.  But that is why the 3 interior OL in the draft really confused me, and still confuses me.  We just drafted Jenkins, LG is set for years.  We just signed Patrick and Turner, and retained Taylor, then we bring in 3 draft picks and IMO a pretty impressive FA G, in Zack Johnson.  I expected to have Hanson vs Patrick for center battle next offseason.  But it looks like this season sees 6 guys competing for the RG spot, which already has a pretty decent player with a high salary occupying the position.  I like Patrick as the all-purpose interior sub, who can play any of the 3 spots if need be.  But that still leaves: Johnson, Runyan, Stepaniak, and Taylor.  I get the "o-line shuffle" with Turner going to tackle, etc.  But IMO that still puts Patrick in as the 3rd guard that is active on game day.  I just can't wrap my head around this one.  And for the record, I don't dislike any of these players.

It's a numbers game.  And it seems to be a Gute thing.  At this point, it's a trend since in three of the last four drafts we've thrown multiple draft picks at a non-premium position hoping something turns over.  In 2017, the Packers drafted Jamaal Williams, Aaron Jones, and Davante Mays.  In 2018, the Packers drafted J'Mon Moore, MVS, and ESB.  In 2020, they took Jon Runyan, Jake Hanson, and Simon Stepaniak.

Just looking at the numbers this year, you've got David Bakhtiari, Elgton Jenkins, Corey Linsley, Billy Turner, and Rick Wagner are penciled in as our starters.  Lane Taylor's contract rework probably ensures him a spot.  That puts us at 6.  As we've discussed Lucas Patrick's extension probably ensures he's on the roster, so you're going to include him in there as well which pushes to 7.  We still don't have a swing OT on the roster, so you're looking at guys like Alex Light, John Leglue, Jon Runyan, Jake Hanson, and Yosuah Nijman competing for the same spot.  Our swing OT puts us at 8.  Realistically speaking, you're looking at 8 or 9 OL on the roster.  Maybe 10 if you've got someone you really, really like as a developmental type, but that's pushing it.  I believe we've only carried 10 OL once since Ted Thompson took over.