Time to Fire LaFleur, Gute, and Murphy And Burn The House Down

[skibrett15]

51 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

First round WR have the lowest pro bowl rate of any position

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2441018-which-positions-are-the-safest-riskiest-at-the-top-of-the-nfl-draft

OT	84	16	19.0%
DL	170	28	16.5%
CB	91	14	15.4%
WR	99	15	15.2%
TE	28	4	14.3%
QB	57	3	5.3%

 

Of the premium positions, and this doesn't break out edge/ILB/IDL like it should, WR is right in there in all-pro rate.

 

And they are right there with some other positions in Pro-bowl rate

CB	91	35	38.5%
OT	84	31	36.9%
DL	170	52	30.6%
WR	99	30	30.3%

 

Now factor in that their relative contract value is higher.  WR is a premium position.

[MacReady]

3 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

Julio Jones is incapable of dressing most weeks, and those he does he can play 20% of the snaps.

 

He's not a viable WR anymore.  He's simply to chronically hurt

Different things matter to different quarterbacks. It's why Watkins was targeted an average of 4.7 times per game with Mahomes and why MVS (behind EXTREMELY talented receivers and Kelce) is being targeted 4.9 times per game with Mahomes.

MVS was targeted an average of 4.1 times per game with Rodgers in spite of being behind one legitimate threat the majority of that time and why Watkins is being targeted 3.4 times now.

Even Jackson with that offense (run heavy, tight end heavy) targeted Watkins 3.8 times per game.

You could say the exact same things about Cobb, who is only a year younger than Jones.

Cobb was targeted 4.3 times per game.

Because he's where Rodgers wants him to be doing what Rodgers wants him to do.

Julio Jones might be cooked physically, but so is Cobb, and Rodgers throws to who he trusts.

Graham was targeted 89 times his first year here plus another 76 in his last season here. At 34 years old.

 

[MacReady]

5 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

OT	84	16	19.0%
DL	170	28	16.5%
CB	91	14	15.4%
WR	99	15	15.2%
TE	28	4	14.3%
QB	57	3	5.3%

 

Of the premium positions, and this doesn't break out edge/ILB/IDL like it should, WR is right in there in all-pro rate.

 

And they are right there with some other positions in Pro-bowl rate

CB	91	35	38.5%
OT	84	31	36.9%
DL	170	52	30.6%
WR	99	30	30.3%

 

Now factor in that their relative contract value is higher.  WR is a premium position.

How do you figure what you just said?

They're ahead of only tight ends and quarterbacks.

Like how do you actually figure?

Additionally, you know there are 3 all-pro receivers per year, right?

They literally have better odds than any other position and yet they're behind all but tight end and QB. When only one TE gets on the all-pro list per year.

[{Family Ghost}]

I think the thing that bugs me most about this year is that it seems LaFleur has taken a back seat to Aaron Rodgers and in turn lost some control of this team.  The offense has kind of become what Aaron wants to do, and the motions and little complexities that LaFleur's offense has been known for are missing.  We are seemingly super easy to play against, because Rodgers in only willing to throw to certain areas of the field.  At what point does LaFleur put his foot down and take back control?  If he's not going to do that then the Packers should consider a major overhaul including coaching.  What they have been doing this past month and a half is a complete failure.

[MacReady]

Pretty sure Cordarelle Patterson got an all-pro for specials one year, too.

But you won’t respond to where I actually went through and showed a 24 bust to 9 hit ratio on top 10 receivers, so…

This isn’t meant to be a conversation where we’re getting to the truth.

You just want to believe what you want to believe whereas some of us actually care to get to the truth.

I started this conversation roughly ten years ago and I have budged my position in order to get to the truth, and the truth is you do not take a WR in the top half of the first round. There’s one exception to that rule.

Your type has a hardline WE NEED TO DRAFT A FIRST ROUND RECEIVER stance even though Adams, Driver, Nelson, Jennings, Jones, Cobb all scream you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Draft OL/DL/QB high, draft skill and other positions mid, fill in the gaps with free agency and trade.

 

[Packerraymond]

2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Pretty sure Cordarelle Patterson got an all-pro for specials one year, too.

But you won’t respond to where I actually went through and showed a 24 bust to 9 hit ratio on top 10 receivers, so…

This isn’t meant to be a conversation where we’re getting to the truth.

You just want to believe what you want to believe whereas some of us actually care to get to the truth.

I started this conversation roughly ten years ago and I have budged my position in order to get to the truth, and the truth is you do not take a WR in the top half of the first round. There’s one exception to that rule.

Your type has a hardline WE NEED TO DRAFT A FIRST ROUND RECEIVER stance even though Adams, Driver, Nelson, Jennings, Jones, Cobb all scream you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Draft OL/DL/QB high, draft skill and other positions mid, fill in the gaps with free agency and trade.

 

Again...this is for a contending team, which we will not be next year. 

[incognito_man]

19 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

And they are right there with some other positions in Pro-bowl rate

WRs are last in pro bowl rate. You asked how they compare to other positions in pro bowl rate and the answer is that they are the least likely position taken in the first round to make a pro bowl.

[skibrett15]

17 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

WRs are last in pro bowl rate. You asked how they compare to other positions in pro bowl rate and the answer is that they are the least likely position taken in the first round to make a pro bowl.

yeah it's good to know that, appreciate the link.

I also wanted to clarify that while they are last in hit rate, they are pretty close to a lot of other highly perceived positions.  They aren't some full standard deviation below LT in terms of hit/bust rate.

And they are highly paid.  Much more highly paid than other highly perceived value positions. 

Which suggests that they are valued by the personnel people in the NFL to be more valuable than positions like LT, Edge, CB and every other position but QB.

As far as Outpost's rants, I'll just leave those be for now.  As is so often the case with him, he chooses to read a post, be inspired by that post to take a position, then invent an imagined point of view to argue against, and then assign that point of view to the original poster, and finally attempt to overwhelm with a posting diarrhea of somewhat related topics and opinions.

[incognito_man]

1 minute ago, skibrett15 said:

yeah it's good to know that, appreciate the link.

I also wanted to clarify that while they are last in hit rate, they are pretty close to a lot of other highly perceived positions.  They aren't some full standard deviation below LT in terms of hit/bust rate.

And they are highly paid.  Much more highly paid than other highly perceived value positions. 

Which suggests that they are valued by the personnel people in the NFL to be more valuable than positions like LT, Edge, CB and every other position but QB.

As far as Outpost's rants, I'll just leave those be for now.  As is so often the case with him, he chooses to read a post, be inspired by that post to take a position, then invent an imagined point of view to argue against, and then assign that point of view to the original poster, and finally attempt to overwhelm with a posting diarrhea of somewhat related topics and opinions.

Sure, but you also need to acknowledge that the ONLY goal of teams is not "winning". It's making money.

Flashy WRs sell tickets. They make owners money. That's what drives market price.

It's not a convincing argument to point to the market as a indicator of their on-the-field value compared to very unsexy positions like OL.

[ThatJerkDave]

Before we declare that we shouldn't take any position with our pick, let's actually see the player and the pick.  Sure was good that the deity Ron Wolf took Vonnie Holliday over Randy Moss.  I won't forget that 4-peat of championships...

[incognito_man]

1 minute ago, ThatJerkDave said:

Before we declare that we shouldn't take any position with our pick, let's actually see the player and the pick.  Sure was good that the deity Ron Wolf took Vonnie Holliday over Randy Moss.  I won't forget that 4-peat of championships...

Agreed. 

I see both points. Unless there's a WR that looks like a generational talent, I'd tend to avoid high in the first round as well.

I think WRs are valuable, but I also think that, like QBs, their contracts do not represent their true on-the-field value. QBs and WRs sell tickets and jerseys because fanz love passing TDs. QBs and WRs also are critical to winning games - but less than the market suggests.

[MacReady]

As far as @skibrett15’s rants about my rants, I’ll never leave those be. As is often the case with him, he states an opinion, has that opinion countered with facts, refuses to address the facts and goes back to attempting 50 yard field goals instead of having a conversation with anything other than getting to the truth of the matter on his mind.

Instead, he relies on opinion and what he wants rather than what’s true.

[skibrett15]

6 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Sure, but you also need to acknowledge that the ONLY goal of teams is not "winning". It's making money.

Flashy WRs sell tickets. They make owners money. That's what drives market price.

It's not a convincing argument to point to the market as a indicator of their on-the-field value compared to very unsexy positions like OL.

Sure.  I can see that.

There's teams that can be built with a $20m+ cap hit WR, and teams without.

Of the teams without, there's ones with a player who is on a path to soon sign a $20m+ WR contract soon, and ones without.

Of the teams without there's ones who invested the draft capital that should have rostered them a receiver who is on pace for a big contract but he busted or got injured instead, and those without.

Here are those without:

Patriots (Tyquan Thornton, N'Keal Harry) also Nelson Agholor, Kendrick Bourne and Devante Parker was a lesson how to set WR money on fire.  Basically they have done the spending just none of the reaping.
Chiefs (Skyy Moore) Also JuJu is the most criminally underpaid player, he might qualify next year.
Packers (Christian Watson)
Bears (Literally no one)

 

So, right now it seems we are on Chicago island as far as team building strategy in the WR department since losing Adams.  I would expect that to change next year.

 

When you draft a No 1 WR that really hits, whether you get him in the 10s, 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s or later in the draft, you get a cap surplus of over 17M.  If you get a Justin Jefferson level player, you get a surplus of 25M.

 

Compare that to CB.  With Stokes or similar you get a surplus of 10M.  If you draft Patrick Surtain II (equivalent to Justin Jefferson at WR) or similar, you get about 13-15M at the absolute high end.

 

The same is true of every other position.  Especially at TE and ILB.  "Premium" positions should be based on contract values - that's the cost to replace the guy outside the draft.  That's what premium means.

[Toddfather]

[AlexGreen#20]

14 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

Sure.  I can see that.

There's teams that can be built with a $20m+ cap hit WR, and teams without.

Of the teams without, there's ones with a player who is on a path to soon sign a $20m+ WR contract soon, and ones without.

Of the teams without there's ones who invested the draft capital that should have rostered them a receiver who is on pace for a big contract but he busted or got injured instead, and those without.

Here are those without:

Patriots (Tyquan Thornton, N'Keal Harry) also Nelson Agholor, Kendrick Bourne and Devante Parker was a lesson how to set WR money on fire.  Basically they have done the spending just none of the reaping.
Chiefs (Skyy Moore) Also JuJu is the most criminally underpaid player, he might qualify next year.
Packers (Christian Watson)
Bears (Literally no one)

 

So, right now it seems we are on Chicago island as far as team building strategy in the WR department since losing Adams.  I would expect that to change next year.

 

When you draft a No 1 WR that really hits, whether you get him in the 10s, 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s or later in the draft, you get a cap surplus of over 17M.  If you get a Justin Jefferson level player, you get a surplus of 25M.

 

Compare that to CB.  With Stokes or similar you get a surplus of 10M.  If you draft Patrick Surtain II (equivalent to Justin Jefferson at WR) or similar, you get about 13-15M at the absolute high end.

 

The same is true of every other position.  Especially at TE and ILB.  "Premium" positions should be based on contract values - that's the cost to replace the guy outside the draft.  That's what premium means.

You're assuming a guy like Justin Jefferson is going to be good value at 25+ per year. I don't think that's remotely a safe conclusion.