2023 Rookie Minicamp / OTAs / Training Camp

[Old Guy]

21 hours ago, ThatJerkDave said:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GarvJo00.htm

Games		Off.		Def.		ST
Year	Age	Tm	Pos	No.	G	GS	Num	Pct	Num	Pct	Num	Pct
Career							0		673		257
2020	21	GNB	DE	53	8	0	0	0%	85	18%	22	10%
2021	22	GNB	DE	53	16	1	0	0%	395	39%	111	28%
2022	23	GNB	LB	53	14	0	0	0%	193	23%	124	35%

Not a lot, but yes, he does.  

No doubt it is time for Garvin to **** or get off the pot. But a guy with his talent is one that you give every chance to, until someone actually takes his spot.  He hasn't been good.  Should we instead have kept Tipa? 

Jon Garvin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dWehHsbPhE&ab_channel=Stadium

Brenton Cox Jr: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEZhx9y6a_8&ab_channel=BrodieKnowsBall

Do you see much of a difference? I sure don't.  Now, we have more team control and a smaller contract for Cox compared to Garvin.  That will be a factor.  And maybe Cox sets the preseason on fire.  That would be great.  But given the information that we have, you can't just write off Garvin for Cox or Hollins.  All of these guys are fighting for one spot. 

 

 

I have no issues with keeping Garvin each of the past three years. Had high hopes for him. He's done nothing to show he's NFL talent. Now, if the light comes on this TC, win. IF he's pretty much the same version of his former self, down the road he has to go. 

Cox has shown in college the ability to get to the QB and create havoc. He likely has much more upside than Garvin at this point. The fact Garvin has skipped OTA's the past two years shows his commitment level isn't where it should be. 

Hollins looked like he could create some pressure on the quarterback, that makes him light years ahead of Garvin. I'm willing to keep an open mind on Garvin, but unless he's clearly better, the guy who is going to be a free agent next year has to go rather than the guy who we would have control over for 3 more seasons in Cox. 

 

Edited June 11, 2023 by Old Guy

[craig]

Jerk, I think those guys might be fighting for two 53-man spots, until Gary returns?  And given that we'll carry a 69-man roster, plus the injured guys like Gary, I think Hollins, Garvin, and Cox all have a pretty easy time making the 69-roster.  

I feel a little differently than you on one or two points, though... 

1. I think Garvin has a great chance to make the team until Gary comes back.  If I had to predict, I'd predict Cox to PS to see if he can both improve as a football player; *AND* stay clean as a professional rather than getting dumped for knucklehead reasons. 
2. Cox will not get three years and counting like Garvin did unless Cox both improves as a player and improves his knucklehead factor.  
3. If/when Gary comes back, though, I'm not sure that all three of those guys would stay on the 69.  If one were to then be released, I'd guess it's 50-50 between Garvin (time finally up) versus Cox (coaches don't love investing time trying to develop knuckleheads.). 
4. Should we have kept Tipa?  Not then; at that time we thought Garvin might improve.  But, he hasn't. 
5. Every failed player was young once, and lots of bad players had good RAS once.  Garvin might not always have Paris, but he'll always have RAS.  
6. Three years should be enough pro-training development for a talent to figure it out.  My normal rule is close the book after 3 years on development guy who haven't developed.  
7. Suppose you don't see difference between college Garvin and college Cox?  Then choose the guy who might get better, not the guy who's been given three years to get better but hasn't.  (Assuming Cox isn't knuckleheading.). 
8. All else equal, choose the guy who's got some years of club control, not the impending FA. 
9. I know Garvin isn't old and had nice RAS 4 years ago, but there's been no improvement trajectory evident, and his RAS hasn't seemed to translate into on-field production.  

The OLB room isn't that deep or that good, so in absence of Gary, I just think it's wide open and kinda easy pickings for these guys.  No surprise that your last guy or your PS guy isn't that good.  

[R T]

15 minutes ago, craig said:

Jerk, I think those guys might be fighting for two 53-man spots, until Gary returns?  And given that we'll carry a 69-man roster, plus the injured guys like Gary, I think Hollins, Garvin, and Cox all have a pretty easy time making the 69-roster.  

I feel a little differently than you on one or two points, though... 

1. I think Garvin has a great chance to make the team until Gary comes back.  If I had to predict, I'd predict Cox to PS to see if he can both improve as a football player; *AND* stay clean as a professional rather than getting dumped for knucklehead reasons. 
2. Cox will not get three years and counting like Garvin did unless Cox both improves as a player and improves his knucklehead factor.  
3. If/when Gary comes back, though, I'm not sure that all three of those guys would stay on the 69.  If one were to then be released, I'd guess it's 50-50 between Garvin (time finally up) versus Cox (coaches don't love investing time trying to develop knuckleheads.). 
4. Should we have kept Tipa?  Not then; at that time we thought Garvin might improve.  But, he hasn't. 
5. Every failed player was young once, and lots of bad players had good RAS once.  Garvin might not always have Paris, but he'll always have RAS.  
6. Three years should be enough pro-training development for a talent to figure it out.  My normal rule is close the book after 3 years on development guy who haven't developed.  
7. Suppose you don't see difference between college Garvin and college Cox?  Then choose the guy who might get better, not the guy who's been given three years to get better but hasn't.  (Assuming Cox isn't knuckleheading.). 
8. All else equal, choose the guy who's got some years of club control, not the impending FA. 
9. I know Garvin isn't old and had nice RAS 4 years ago, but there's been no improvement trajectory evident, and his RAS hasn't seemed to translate into on-field production.  

The OLB room isn't that deep or that good, so in absence of Gary, I just think it's wide open and kinda easy pickings for these guys.  No surprise that your last guy or your PS guy isn't that good.  

A number of good points craig. 

Tipa had a pretty shady background and is the reason he got the boot from TCU and ended up at Utah State, also the reason he went undrafted in all likelihood. 

Barry mentioned in the past you need 4 Edge rushers to play his system, so when Gary returns none of those guys are one of the 4 barring more injuries. Who has more value as a 5th Edge for the 53 if ST's is the main reason they are on the roster? That is probably Garvin at this point.

As for the club control thing, that probably has little to no play in the decision-making process with this group. The Packers have Gary (soon to be), Van Ness and Enagbare under their control for the next 3 years at the least and with the desire to add to every position every year it's doubtful a long-term decision comes into play with the trio of Garvin/Cox/Hollins. Hamilton probably should be in the conversation with this group also. 

 

[craig]

Agree, Hamilton has a chance, too.  So, you're saying if/when Gary returns, Garvin might have edge over Hollins?  That could be true, yeah.  I'd think Cox as a 1st-year guy would not be a ST guy, I'm guessing in college he was perceived as a snaps man and probably didn't get any ST experience.  

Hollins didn't play much ST, although he wasn't in camp, so didn't get much chance.  But yeah, Garvin might outlast Hollins based on ST, definitely plausible.  

I think from past discussions, I'm maybe a little less ST-focused than you are?  Packers are a D+D organization, so I like to have a D+D guy at the back of a position room with the upside to develop into a useful snaps player, if possible.  And if Barry needs 4 rushers, 5th man is always one ding away from being 4th rusher.  So *if* it's October and Gary is returning, but Gute is thinking Preston might be expiring, I might favor Hollins over Garvin as the 4th rusher for next year?  

I am also perhaps more naively optimistic that good, talented athletes with professional work-ethic can develop into ST guys.  So that keeping the higher-ceiling snaps prospect need not conflict much with valuing ST?  Perhaps after a full camp with Rich, Hollins will be as good or better ST than Garvin anyway?  Who knows. 

But yeah, for sure coaches and Gute need to consider all of that kind of stuff.  Lots of decisions and eval those guys need to do.  Often decisions that are more nuanced and complex than my simplistic evaluation can appreciate.  

 

[R T]

1 hour ago, craig said:

Agree, Hamilton has a chance, too.  So, you're saying if/when Gary returns, Garvin might have edge over Hollins?  That could be true, yeah.  I'd think Cox as a 1st-year guy would not be a ST guy, I'm guessing in college he was perceived as a snaps man and probably didn't get any ST experience.  

Hollins didn't play much ST, although he wasn't in camp, so didn't get much chance.  But yeah, Garvin might outlast Hollins based on ST, definitely plausible.  

I think from past discussions, I'm maybe a little less ST-focused than you are?  Packers are a D+D organization, so I like to have a D+D guy at the back of a position room with the upside to develop into a useful snaps player, if possible.  And if Barry needs 4 rushers, 5th man is always one ding away from being 4th rusher.  So *if* it's October and Gary is returning, but Gute is thinking Preston might be expiring, I might favor Hollins over Garvin as the 4th rusher for next year?  

I am also perhaps more naively optimistic that good, talented athletes with professional work-ethic can develop into ST guys.  So that keeping the higher-ceiling snaps prospect need not conflict much with valuing ST?  Perhaps after a full camp with Rich, Hollins will be as good or better ST than Garvin anyway?  Who knows. 

But yeah, for sure coaches and Gute need to consider all of that kind of stuff.  Lots of decisions and eval those guys need to do.  Often decisions that are more nuanced and complex than my simplistic evaluation can appreciate.  

 

I'm saying the 5th Edge spot is a wide-open competition just like the 6th WR spot is and it isn't out of the question that they don't keep that many on the opening 53 with either spot. 

The one and only thing that Hollins does better than Garvin and it's a big thing, is he rushes with speed and can bend the corner. That is the kind of thing people notice on TV and at times leads to making a play, but Hollins is a liability at setting an edge in run defense and is a one down player. He is not some high upside difference maker; he has been cut by 2 teams already and the Packers are his 3rd team in 4 years in the NFL. 

[ThatJerkDave]

All fair points.  I think there may be a little wiggle room also depending on what Van Ness is.  If he is more of a DE that can stand up, perhaps we keep more classic stand-up edge guys.  On the other hand, if he is more of a Preston Smith, that may take away an extra roster spot.

[Refugee]

4 hours ago, R T said:

A number of good points craig. 

Tipa had a pretty shady background and is the reason he got the boot from TCU and ended up at Utah State, also the reason he went undrafted in all likelihood. 

Barry mentioned in the past you need 4 Edge rushers to play his system, so when Gary returns none of those guys are one of the 4 barring more injuries. Who has more value as a 5th Edge for the 53 if ST's is the main reason they are on the roster? That is probably Garvin at this point.

As for the club control thing, that probably has little to no play in the decision-making process with this group. The Packers have Gary (soon to be), Van Ness and Enagbare under their control for the next 3 years at the least and with the desire to add to every position every year it's doubtful a long-term decision comes into play with the trio of Garvin/Cox/Hollins. Hamilton probably should be in the conversation with this group also. 

 

I didn’t know about Tipa’s incident at TCU.  Sounds like he was young, drunk and stupid. I remember his position coach, Mike Smith, would talk him up basically saying he had all the tools except weight to be successful. Of course every coach will talk up their guys.

Hollins did have the year with Barry in LA, which was part of the reason he came over. I looks like Tipa and Garvin had many more ST snaps than him and that is obviously a factor for guys that far down the depth chart. Hollins will likely have to play a bigger role there if he wants to stick this year. *Just saw Craig made this exact same point. 

Edited June 10, 2023 by Refugee

[HyponGrey]

On 6/8/2023 at 8:33 AM, R T said:

Want to question something, maybe question Alexander who has a 700K bonus and Douglas who has a 300K bonus and why they are not there. They are leaders of the team, players others follow. No one is following Garvin.  

Get this fake *** bravado out of here. Two MF who are constantly hurt not risking extra reps? There are plenty of vets at voluntaries. I don't want to see anybody banging their head on concrete to prove they're tough. This ain't 1975 when a torn ACL was just a limp, we actually know better now.

Edited June 11, 2023 by HyponGrey

[ThatJerkDave]

Of note, keeping and cutting Cox, Garvin, Hamilton, or Hollins, costs the team nearly the same amount of money against the cap.  The least cap friendly is keeping Hollins, who has the biggest contract, and Garvin and Cox have very small dead cap hits to go with it.  I don't believe that this very trivial amount of cap space (I could actually pay it), will play a factor.  Our 4th/5th edge guy will be making about 1.3 million (counting dead caps for the others).

 

Long story short, cap ramifications shouldn't be a factor for the (likely) final edge position. 

[ThatJerkDave]

So, can anyone make heads or tails out of the CB room after:  Jaire, Stokes, Rasul, and Nixon?

[R T]

2 hours ago, HyponGrey said:

Get this fake *** bravado out of here. Two MF who are constantly hurt not risking extra reps? There are plenty of vets at voluntaries. I don't want to see anybody banging their head on concrete to prove they're tough. This ain't 1975 when a torn ACL was just a limp, we actually know better now.

Triggered much, nobody is running Oklahoma drills, and nobody is trying to prove they are tough in today's NFL off season programs. It's a ******* country club, so get that fake *** bravado out of here.  

[Chili]

[Zycho32]

9 hours ago, ThatJerkDave said:

So, can anyone make heads or tails out of the CB room after:  Jaire, Stokes, Rasul, and Nixon?

Ballentine(good ST guy) and Valentine(likely PS). Expect SJC to be cut. Kiondre Thomas and Tyrell Ford seem to be battling for a second spot on the PS(both could make it, but it might be redundant), but one of them could come out like gangbusters on ST and leap over Ballentine or even pair up with him(there's a slight question about who the other Gunner opposite Ballentine will be, since it'll likely not be Rudy Ford and most definitely NOT Nixon).

[Old Guy]

14 minutes ago, Zycho32 said:

Ballentine(good ST guy) and Valentine(likely PS). Expect SJC to be cut. Kiondre Thomas and Tyrell Ford seem to be battling for a second spot on the PS(both could make it, but it might be redundant), but one of them could come out like gangbusters on ST and leap over Ballentine or even pair up with him(there's a slight question about who the other Gunner opposite Ballentine will be, since it'll likely not be Rudy Ford and most definitely NOT Nixon).

Wonder if Wicks could be a gunner. He's big, strong and athletic. Don't see him getting a ton of opportunities on offense his rookie year either. Make him our Matthew Slater. 

[R T]

29 minutes ago, Zycho32 said:

Ballentine(good ST guy) and Valentine(likely PS). Expect SJC to be cut. Kiondre Thomas and Tyrell Ford seem to be battling for a second spot on the PS(both could make it, but it might be redundant), but one of them could come out like gangbusters on ST and leap over Ballentine or even pair up with him(there's a slight question about who the other Gunner opposite Ballentine will be, since it'll likely not be Rudy Ford and most definitely NOT Nixon).

One of the really fun things to watch this coming training camp will be the roster spot battles at almost every position. The past few seasons many of those spots were taken by older vets and there were few spots up for grabs like this year, should be a very spirited camp.