AlexGreen#20 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 5 hours ago, TransientTexan said: You have any proof of this? Or just your fairy tales? There's zero other explanation for it. It certainly isn't in field production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 5 hours ago, Scoremore said: Do you ever bother to watch the pressers? Guess not. All you have to do is listen. I'm not going to bother pulling up stats. Beasley has been productive both in Dallas and Buffalo. Go look for yourself. Pretty nice career for an UDFA. He really hasn't been that productive. He's been force fed some highly inefficient targets. He's going to be 33 this year. He isn't getting better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 5 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: He really hasn't been that productive. He's been force fed some highly inefficient targets. He's going to be 33 this year. He isn't getting better. Oh I agree. No interest in bringing him in. We don't need another slot. He's also at that age where receivers drop off. The FA WR market is piss poor. Only guy I really wanted was Robinson. Gute may unearth some gem but it won't be some washed big name FA. Only true #1 will have to come from the draft. We'll probably take at least 2 guys and sign a FA later on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibrett15 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 19 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Beasley isn't even a full time starter, and his volume plummeted in the second half due to having subpar durability. Beasley has never had a 1000 yard season. he has some really interesting vs. zone and vs man splits. That's about the only thing interesting about cole beasley my opinion: don't like the person, don't like the player Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 5 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: There's zero other explanation for it. It certainly isn't in field production. He averaged 800+yd the last 3 seasons. Yards aren’t the end-all-be-all, but that’s frequently enough to get casual fans to talk about a player. It’s certainly more production that any of the receivers currently on the roster. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green19 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 8 minutes ago, TransientTexan said: He averaged 800+yd the last 3 seasons. Yards aren’t the end-all-be-all, but that’s frequently enough to get casual fans to talk about a player. It’s certainly more production that any of the receivers currently on the roster. 800 yards on 109 targets isn't impressive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 11 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: 800 yards on 109 targets isn't impressive. Ok, but loads of NFL fans do not look at things with that level of depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 14 minutes ago, TransientTexan said: Ok, but loads of NFL fans do not look at things with that level of depth. Even 800 yards isn't that impressive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 20 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Even 800 yards isn't that impressive. That's a pretty nice season. What Packer receiver outside of Tae last year had that many yards? Regardless I don't want him either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 2 minutes ago, Scoremore said: That's a pretty nice season. What Packer receiver outside of Tae last year had that many yards? Regardless I don't want him either. What Packer receiver other than Tae has had 325 targets over the last 3 years? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/green-bay-packers-team-stats?season=2021&category=receiving None. Next highest yrd total last year was Lazard at 513. No point in arguing about Beasley. I really don't care and don't want him. In his career he was a fairly productive slot receiver. We already have 2 guys in Rodgers and Cobb to fill that role. It will be a very interesting season next year now that Aaron no longer has his security blanket. 2 draft picks and a low level FA signing is what I'm expecting. We'll be OK next year. Losing Adams hurts but a couple of new adds not expecting a huge drop off on O. Need to address the TE position too. Gute has got some holes to fill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 Hypothetical Rodgers in the last 3 years is averaging approximately Comp: 365 Attempts: 535 Yards: 4200 TD: 36 Lets see where we can distribute those numbers based on the averages Targets RB: 100-105 TE: 90 WR: 340 Adams went from Targets 2019 = 127 2020 = 149 2021 = 169 Lets distribute those targets among 3 WR at the top more like WR1 = 100 WR2 = 90 WR3 = 70 WR4 = 40 That leaves 40 targets that can be spread around. WR5 gets around 20-25 due to various injuries and such over the course of the season. So we have 15-20 remaining that can be added to a RB passing game utilization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Even 800 yards isn't that impressive. To the garden-variety NFL fan, it is. At least for a #2. Esp. given the box scores of other options currently on the GB roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skibrett15 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 44 minutes ago, squire12 said: WR1 = 100 WR2 = 90 WR3 = 70 WR4 = 40 we also might see the packers throw less often. Assuming Cobb gets his 40-50 targets as the 3. Probably a signee as either the 2 or the 1 will determine whether we have a split like this, or just a mess of 50-70 target guys including a bunch of TEs at 20-40, gadget RB/WR guys getting 20, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.