Jump to content

2021 GB Roster & Free Agents


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

By people who aren't experts. Who cares what the draft magazines said. The reality reveals itself during the draft and properly assigns the ACTUAL value NFL teams places on the players.

Your theory doesnt hold water.

Gary was never the 12th best - or rated player - in his draft. That was never the case.

He was selected there because the Packers valued him there relative to their other needs, draft positions and perceived depth of talent at those positions.

If - as you say - the NFL imprimatur was put on him as the 12th best / rated prospect - thats either one lousy system (cause he's heading into his 4th year - hasnt become a full time player yet and injury isnt a cause) or the Packers made the biggest overreach of all time.

 He was selected there relative to GBs overall needs and draft selections.

As @cannondalepointed out, Johnny Manziel was never a better pro prospect than AR. Never. His selection was always very controversial. He was a midget by NFL standards and he came with *a lot* of baggage and question marks. His selection at 22 (higher than AR) doesnt mean he was deemed a better prospect or more likely to succeed than AR. That simply was never the case. Ever.

Your theory does not hold water.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Leader said:

Your theory doesnt hold water.

Gary was never the 12th best - or rated player - in his draft. That was never the case

Lol

Yes he was.

The cognitive dissonance is astounding. You're trying to convince yourself and others that you had a better gauge on his NFL value than NFL teams did.

Such ego.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Lol

Yes he was.

The cognitive dissonance is astounding. You're trying to convince yourself and others that you had a better gauge on his NFL value than NFL teams did.

Such ego.

The Gary thing is not a good example, cause there's an easy case he was top 12, if not higher and that wouldnt be surprising to me.

Your basic point that you can take the 23rd player in a draft from 2003 and the 23rd player in a draft from 2017 and say the NFL valued them the same is just flat wrong. You're stuck in a vacuum with two numbers and the entire outer world of variables circles around you and you ignore them. I'm not going to argue further with you cause you post crap like the last sentence there (pot meet kettle) but you aren't the guy agreeing with NFL data, just simply construing it to fit a point you cannot admit you're wrong on. It's really unfortunate because your original premise regarding Rodgers, his cap hit and the value that the Love pick could one day bring is all spot on to me. I could probably write a 10 page essay on all the outside variables you're ignoring comparing the 24th pick from 2005 and the 26th pick in 2020.

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

Proof?

Is there evidence that there are more QBs selected higher in the draft since that was implemented?

Bill Polian stated it was a factor and I would trust his opinion more than yours tbh

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, JBURGE said:

Bill Polian stated it was a factor and I would trust his opinion more than yours tbh

He said what was a factor? Obviously the rookie cap is a factor. But if it's a measurable impact, it should show up in the results.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Your basic point that you can take the 23rd player in a draft from 2003 and the 23rd player in a draft from 2017 and say the NFL valued them the same is just flat wrong

Why is it wrong?

It's by default true unless you can somehow show that guys picked at relatively the same spot have a statistically significant variance in their perceived value year-to-year.

My stance is literally the exact opposite of ego. Showing deference to the experts in the field is literally the opposite of ego. I'm deferring to their actual actions as a measuring stick. You guys seem to think your opinion on value is better than the actual actions of the experts...

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

The Gary thing is not a good example, cause there's an easy case he was top 12, if not higher and that wouldnt be surprising to me.

If the 12 best player in a draft cant get steady field time for 4 years......thats one lousy draft. Outside some minor injuries along the way - the road was clear for him to make a difference. If he could bring it - they'd have found a way to get him on the field. Didnt happen. We're hoping this will be the year he takes the reins completely.  If he was the 12th best......doesnt speak well of the others drafted.

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

By people who aren't experts. Who cares what the draft magazines said. The reality reveals itself during the draft and properly assigns the ACTUAL value NFL teams places on the players.

Get what you are saying but NFL GM's miss all the time.  Brady was drafted in the 6th round.  It's an inexact science any way you slice it.  Teams just don't go on BPA they consider need also.  There are huge reaches and guys that fall that shouldn't have.  Aaron was considered to go #1 he fell because teams didn't need a QB.  There was the Tedford thing as well.  Anyway Aaron was a better prospect than Love.  His fall was shocked a lot of people.  Love got drafted about where he was expected to go.  Packers traded up because if they hadn't he'd be a Patriot right now.  As far as Gary it's looking like he's worthy of #12.  Let's just hope we get him on a 2nd contract.  Dude is a stud.

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

If the 12 best player in a draft cant get steady field time for 4 years......thats one lousy draft. Outside some minor injuries along the way - the road was clear for him to make a difference. If he could bring it - they'd have found a way to get him on the field. Didnt happen. We're hoping this will be the year he takes the reins completely.  If he was the 12th best......doesnt speak well of the others drafted.

You're using hindsight. No one knew how much playing time any guy was going to get on draft night.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Scoremore said:

Get what you are saying but NFL GM's miss all the time.  Brady was drafted in the 6th round.  It's an inexact science any way you slice it.  Teams just don't go on BPA they consider need also.  There are huge reaches and guys that fall that shouldn't have.  Aaron was considered to go #1 he fell because teams didn't need a QB.  There was the Tedford thing as well.  Anyway Aaron was a better prospect than Love.  His fall was shocked a lot of people.  Love got drafted about where he was expected to go.  Packers traded up because if they hadn't he'd be a Patriot right now.  As far as Gary it's looking like he's worthy of #12.  Let's just hope we get him on a 2nd contract.  Dude is a stud.

I know. I meant to elucidate this point earlier and kinda addressed it. I'm not arguing that GMs at "efficient" are finding genuine NFL talent via the draft, my ONLY point is that relative draft value is best determined by draft position. AT THAT SNAPSHOT in time (of the draft), Aaron Rodgers and Jordan Love were viewed by the league of having the same relative value as evidenced by their similar draft positions. There are one million and one variables that go into that evaluation, and 32 billion dollar teams collectively determined they have similar value.

My ONLY gripe was w/ the argument that Rodgers was a significantly superior PROSPECT than Jordan Love was. Their prospectness value is forever saved in the snapshot of time of their respective draft days.

Edited by incognito_man
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Why is it wrong?

It's by default true unless you can somehow show that guys picked at relatively the same spot have a statistically significant variance in their perceived value year-to-year.

My stance is literally the exact opposite of ego. Showing deference to the experts in the field is literally the opposite of ego. I'm deferring to their actual actions as a measuring stick. You guys seem to think your opinion on value is better than the actual actions of the experts...

You're making a massive assumption that where a player was drafted equals where they were graded. That's completely incorrect to me.

QB is especially unique as it's the only position in football where only the starter plays in the game.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Packerraymond said:

You're using hindsight. No one knew how much playing time any guy was going to get on draft night.

? No. I'm simply saying that the 12th best player in any draft - barring injury - should be able to get field time.

Now listen - I like Gary - bought in to the "he's raw and it'll take time" mantra - and appreciate the work he and the coaches have put in to get him where he's at now.

It just begs belief that he was the 12th best player in that draft given the length of time its taken for him to make an impact.

In other words - his selection was based on GBs player valuations which is formed by their needs - not - some "NFL-wide" standard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

You're making a massive assumption that where a player was drafted equals where they were graded. That's completely incorrect to me.

No. I'm making the (correct) observation that a player was drafted where he was valued. There are many, MANY variables that go into draft position other than on-the-field grade.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Leader said:

? No. I'm simply saying that the 12th best player in any draft - barring injury - should be able to get field time.

Now listen - I like Gary - bought in to the "he's raw and it'll take time" mantra - and appreciate the work he and the coaches have put in to get him where he's at now.

It just begs belief that he was the 12th best player in that draft given the length of time its taken for him to make an impact.

In other words - his selection was based on GBs player valuations which is formed by their needs - not - some "NFL-wide" standard.

That's not how it always works. We drafted Gary when we had two really solid players in front of him. Doesn't make him any less of a draft prospect.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

No. I'm making the (correct) observation that a player was drafted where he was valued. There are many, MANY variables that go into draft position other than on-the-field grade.

Not that's not correct. You're telling me if the Bengals or Chargers have a QB as the BPA that they will be taking him this year?

Link to post
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...