Packerraymond Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 1 minute ago, packfanfb said: Understood. I can at least empathize with that view, I get it. But yes, I look at it more from a talent hierarchy and believe this team's best 2 WRs for 2022 currently aren't on the team. We'll see how it plays out. The Packers aren't spending that to bring MVS back to be #4 or #5, if he's signed, he's at worst #3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 4 minutes ago, Leader said: Fine..just get me somebody dynamic - with juice - somebody who you're hoping they'll throw to because of what he's capable of. We have that now? Not even close. That's who I want as our #1 - then you can compliment him with Lazard / MVS / Tonyan etc to achieve a wide ranging attack that challenges on down to CB3 and covers the entire field. Also, I'm eager to see some production from the TE unit again. That unit fell off the charts after Tonyan went down. Non-existant. Allen Lazard led the league in targeted passer rating. MVS led the league in Yards/Reception the year before. Those are both extremes on the "juice" scale. We spent our Calvin Johnson money on our LT. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 3 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: The Packers aren't spending that to bring MVS back to be #4 or #5, if he's signed, he's at worst #3. Agree. I've no idea how much they'll pay the guy...but MVS at #3 I can live with. At this juncture, I'm buying into the conversations that Lazard's actually performing statistically better than my eyeballs are telling my brain........fine. There's (apparently) something wrong with my eyesight....but if Lazard's on the cusp of breaking out (now that Mr. Target is gone....) - then fine. Just get me somebody young who's A PLAYER. LIke a holy **** look at that guy....kinda guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitnhope Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 3 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said: If Rodgers isn't a good enough QB to win with MVS and Allen Lazard taking huge snaps, we overpaid him by 30 million per and he's not elite. An elite QB doesn't need elite talent at every position around him to not suck in the playoffs. Ridiculous. It seems you really enjoy having Rodger's lose more than you enjoy Packers wins. MVS and especially Lazard are low level NFL receivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 4 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: We spent our Calvin Johnson money on our LT. Draft him. Get outside our "positional value chart" world....go and get a player. Live dangerously.....for once. 1 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, packfanfb said: Understood. I can at least empathize with that view, I get it. But yes, I look at it more from a talent hierarchy and believe this team's best 2 WRs for 2022 currently aren't on the team. We'll see how it plays out. Here's what I don't get about this position. Why are you so uncomfortable with MVS/Lazard as WR #2 and WR #3 but very comfortable with: Royce Newman at RG and Jake Hanson as the only "veteran" IOL backup Yosh Nijman as the backup RT Dean Lowry as the starting UT Tyler Lancaster as the starting SSDE Ty Summers/Isaiah McDuffie as the backup ILBs. The lack of DL talent has killed us WAY more often than a lack of talent at WR has regardless of how up/down the unit is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 19, 2022 Author Share Posted March 19, 2022 2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: The Packers aren't spending that to bring MVS back to be #4 or #5, if he's signed, he's at worst #3. Right. My depth chart in terms of predicted targets/production would be as follows. (and yes, I know the Packers won't see it this way): WR1: Rookie/FA WR2: Rookie/FA WR3: MVS or similar type speed guy WR4: Lazard WR5: Cobb (slot) WR6: Rodgers or someone else who is a ST guy if they beat him out (if Rodgers doesn't show anything in PS I don't think he's a roster lock like last year even as a 3rd rd pick). Lazard will always be the square peg for me. I think he's at best a low end 3, high end 4 guy and if he can't play specials that's a minus for that spot. However, I understand the Packers value him more than I do. 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, Leader said: Draft him. Get outside our "positional value chart" world....go and get a player. Live dangerously.....for once. Why does drafting a WR and not an UT help this team? Do you feel Dean Lowry is just miles better than Allen Lazard, such that a subpar starter at a more important position hurts you more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 (edited) 4 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Why does drafting a WR and not an UT help this team? Do you feel Dean Lowry is just miles better than Allen Lazard, such that a subpar starter at a more important position hurts you more? Oh stop it AG okay? I mean seriously. You've been off on a point / counterpoint rant for days. Appreciate the data but all I want is a really talented WR. Can we fit that one player into your statistical/analytical world view and not have the team collapse outright? Edited March 19, 2022 by Leader Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 19, 2022 Author Share Posted March 19, 2022 (edited) 10 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: Here's what I don't get about this position. Why are you so uncomfortable with MVS/Lazard as WR #2 and WR #3 but very comfortable with: Royce Newman at RG and Jake Hanson as the only "veteran" IOL backup Yosh Nijman as the backup RT Dean Lowry as the starting UT Tyler Lancaster as the starting SSDE Ty Summers/Isaiah McDuffie as the backup ILBs. The lack of DL talent has killed us WAY more often than a lack of talent at WR has regardless of how up/down the unit is. For the same reason I want Jaire, Stokes AND Douglas for the CB position on the other side. WR 2 has to be a really good player, not a role guy. WR 3 should be a "good" player as well or at least a guy who's high end at one skill (i.e. MVS). This notion that teams don't need high end WR rooms to win hasn't held up, especially in the last 3 years. Chiefs, Tampa and Rams all had at least 2 borderline superstar pass catchers. The Bengals were loaded there as well. I don't think there's an argument a guy like Lazard cracks the top 3, maybe even 4 of any of those teams. Also, I'm not satisfied with some of those other positions you mentioned. That's why I draft Smith in the 2nd to maybe start day 1 at RG. I drafted Jones to replace and upgrade Lancaster, etc. Nijman is fine until Jenkins comes back and becomes our RT. If you don't want him, resign Kelly for cheap to get you through weeks 1-6. Edited March 19, 2022 by packfanfb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 3 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Right. My depth chart in terms of predicted targets/production would be as follows. (and yes, I know the Packers won't see it this way): WR1: Rookie/FA WR2: Rookie/FA WR3: MVS or similar type speed guy WR4: Lazard WR5: Cobb (slot) WR6: Rodgers or someone else who is a ST guy if they beat him out (if Rodgers doesn't show anything in PS I don't think he's a roster lock like last year even as a 3rd rd pick). Lazard will always be the square peg for me. I think he's at best a low end 3, high end 4 guy and if he can't play specials that's a minus for that spot. However, I understand the Packers value him more than I do. Why do you think Allen Lazard sucks though? He's had Y/Target of 9.2, 9.8, and 8.6. He's had Y/Reception of 13.6, 13.7, and 12.8. He had 8 TDs last year. His predictive and efficiency numbers look fantastic. If he played for another team, he would be the perfect, buy low candidate. It's not even like we don't have the evidence that he's underutilized by his QB. All you have to do is turn on the tape of the 49ers playoff game and you can se he's getting shorted targets by his QB. He's answered every question anybody had of him coming out of college. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 11 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Right. My depth chart in terms of predicted targets/production would be as follows. (and yes, I know the Packers won't see it this way): WR1: Rookie/FA WR2: Rookie/FA WR3: MVS or similar type speed guy WR4: Lazard WR5: Cobb (slot) WR6: Rodgers or someone else who is a ST guy if they beat him out (if Rodgers doesn't show anything in PS I don't think he's a roster lock like last year even as a 3rd rd pick). Lazard will always be the square peg for me. I think he's at best a low end 3, high end 4 guy and if he can't play specials that's a minus for that spot. However, I understand the Packers value him more than I do. Lazard as a #4 is bad enough to be considered libel. Guy has been top 5 in DVOA and DYAR amongst his target share peers for like 3 consecutive seasons. That screams, give him more targets, not less. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 7 minutes ago, Leader said: Oh stop it AG okay? I mean seriously. You've been off on a point / counterpoint rant for days. Appreciate the data but all I want is a really talented WR. Can we fit that one player into your statistical/analytical world view and not have the team collapse outright? You're the one that's advocating so strongly that we need a stud at WR. My question is why? I don't understand why so many people are willing to fight and die on this hill that we need to bring in a star at WR but have been fine with Lowry at UT for what feels like a decade now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 19, 2022 Author Share Posted March 19, 2022 Just now, Packerraymond said: Lazard as a #4 is bad enough to be considered libel. Guy has been top 5 in DVOA and DYAR amongst his target share peers for like 3 consecutive seasons. That screams, give him more targets, not less. Again, I know people disagree. Sounds like Lazard will get plenty of opportunities to change my mind this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: Lazard as a #4 is bad enough to be considered libel. Guy has been top 5 in DVOA and DYAR amongst his target share peers for like 3 consecutive seasons. That screams, give him more targets, not less. Agree. As I said above - if Lazard's ready to break out now that Davante's gone.....that's more than fine with me. However - I dont think we can push those "maybes" into the center of the table....when we're supposed to be in "All In" mode. Or can we? Lazard as #2 - I can live with...if I have to. Lazard as #3 - all the better (presuming they replace his production with somebody who's currently not on the roster - and that's not MVS IMO) 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.