2024 Rookie Minicamp, OTA's & Training Camp

[OneTwoSixFive]

2 hours ago, Old Guy said:

The way the Packers are drafting WRs is working pretty darn well. Why change it? There are always good WRs to be had in round 2-3-4, even later. Scouting departments just have to be good enough to find them. 

The Packers' scouting department has been good enough. 

You missed my point, which is that if the Packers draft a WR in round one, they wouldn't be changing anything.

The Packers will try to get best value as long as they don't have a need so glaring (at whatever position group) that they have almost no choice. If best value is a WR they won't let past history stop them for one second. That will depend on the relative value of those on offer compared to positions they DO often favour in round one. Many other things come into play, like draft depth at certain position groups and how fast things tail off. 

Since it has been a fairly deep series of drafts for receivers, it takes some serious talent to be an order of magnitude greater than what would be available in round two. So receivers tend not to be taken in the first by the Pack.....but if such a guy IS available one year and is also the highest graded guy available at any position, expect the Packers to take him.

[OneTwoSixFive]

The problem the Packers have in the future is that not all their receivers can get a big payday, at least not with the Packers.

They will lose some, unless some of their receivers are willing to take a contract that is below what their ability suggests they get. Maybe the WR losses are guys whose contracts are allowed to expire, or maybe one or more get traded. 

Now we have the huge Love contract cranking up in the next few seasons, there just isn't cap room for everyone, unless the Packers push so much debt into the future they trigger a boom-bust cycle with deeper cuts down the road..........or they just draft more WRs again, to augment what they kept and keep overall costs down.

I mentioned elsewhere that the 49ers had 14 players making over $5m pa, or 15 if you include Brock Purdy's upcoming big-money contract which they must pay up for. The Packers only had 9 guys at $5m+ including Love. The Packers are (in my opinion) setting themselves up well for the future with so much young talent (there are quite a few older guys on the 49ers roster). However, if the Packers youth movement continues, it only works for as long as the Packers keep drafting well. If they bomb, things get tricky.

Maybe they can absorb one bad draft year, but two on the trot, it could be difficult to deal with when a big chunk of the cap goes to one person, which is todays NFL, so you must find ways to deal with it.

Edited August 5 by OneTwoSixFive

[Brat&Beer]

Here's something you would not have seen under Joe Barry: 10 defenders within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage.

 

 

Edited August 5 by Brat&Beer

[PossibleCabbage]

3 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

So receivers tend not to be taken in the first by the Pack.....but if such a guy IS available one year and is also the highest graded guy available at any position, expect the Packers to take him.

Yeah, it's elucidating to look back at how many WRs went before the Packers picked in each draft (and who the next guy was)

2024: 4 (Xavier Worthy)
2023: 0 (Jaxson Smith-Njigba)
2022: 6 (Christian Watson)
2021: 5 (Elijah Moore)
2020: 6 (Tee Higgins) 
2019: 0 (Hollywood Brown)
2018: 0 (D.J. Moore)
2017: 3 (Zay Jones)
2016: 4 (Sterling Shepard)
2015: 6 (Devin Smith)

I'll cut it off here since 2014 was the year they drafted Davante Adams.  A few things stand out.  First is that the guys they passed on are not all-world WRs destined for the hall of fame and you'd genuinely rather have Jaire and Love than DJ Moore and Tee Higgins.  The other thing that happens is that sometimes when the Packers do pick higher there's not a "rare talent" available and a lot of the time when they is a guy or three like that in the draft the position gets absolutely hammered before the Packers pick.

So it's probably more accidental than philosophical.  You could argue "why didn't they just trade up to get [whomever]" but ultimately a bunch of teams could have done that but didn't.  Like the Chargers, Saints, Seahawks, and Titans absolutely could have used Justin Jefferson had they made a modest trade up that they didn't do.

 

[Refugee]

43 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said:

Yeah, it's elucidating to look back at how many WRs went before the Packers picked in each draft (and who the next guy was)

2024: 4 (Xavier Worthy)
2023: 0 (Jaxson Smith-Njigba)
2022: 6 (Christian Watson)
2021: 5 (Elijah Moore)
2020: 6 (Tee Higgins) 
2019: 0 (Hollywood Brown)
2018: 0 (D.J. Moore)
2017: 3 (Zay Jones)
2016: 4 (Sterling Shepard)
2015: 6 (Devin Smith)

I'll cut it off here since 2014 was the year they drafted Davante Adams.  A few things stand out.  First is that the guys they passed on are not all-world WRs destined for the hall of fame and you'd genuinely rather have Jaire and Love than DJ Moore and Tee Higgins.  The other thing that happens is that sometimes when the Packers do pick higher there's not a "rare talent" available and a lot of the time when they is a guy or three like that in the draft the position gets absolutely hammered before the Packers pick.

So it's probably more accidental than philosophical.  You could argue "why didn't they just trade up to get [whomever]" but ultimately a bunch of teams could have done that but didn't.  Like the Chargers, Saints, Seahawks, and Titans absolutely could have used Justin Jefferson had they made a modest trade up that they didn't do.

 

This is what I was getting at earlier, but thank you for breaking down each year. Of course there were some years where some very good WRs were picked up later (2017 especially had some big body WRs that the Pack like go later) but that means scouts for all 32 teams slept on them for one reason or another. We have supposedly been in the running for WR many years but just missed out like Aiyuk with our consolation prize being QB1OTF. We will grab a guy early if he fits the profile but pass if it’s not a perfect fit. Overall, the hits have outweighed the misses. 

[vegas492]

I wish it was that simple.  No one being worth the pick.

But that whole WR deal is a really complex issue.

On the surface, we didn't do much to reinforce that room when it was only Adams there.  

On the surface, those guys taken directly after weren't exactly "All World" and with hindsight, some of our picks are light years better.

But then there is this...adding quality to that room should have been a focus.  We had Rodgers.  Adams.  And nothing much else at WR or TE.  It should have been a focal point.

But then there is this, we had Rodgers.  And since we had him for a long time, we knew it would take time to gain his trust.  So the longer he played, I get why we didn't invest heavily because he'd use a 5'th rounder as much as he'd use a higher round pick. 

But then there is this.  We had Rodgers.  He should have been able to elevate "lesser" receivers.

So yeah, it is a deep issue.  No side is "right".  No side is "wrong".  It is what it is.  And now here we are with what, maybe 7 good receivers in camp?  It's ridiculous.  One has to ask, are they really that good?  Or, has the culture changed enough to where these younger guys are getting more and better opportunities?  The truth is probably some of both.  They are talented, probably moreso than the rounds where they were drafted.  And yes, they are getting better opportunities now than in the past.

[Gopackgonerd]

2 hours ago, Brat&Beer said:

Here's something you would not have seen under Joe Barry: 10 defenders within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage.

 

 

Its beautiful

[Lodestar]

 

 

[Brat&Beer]

Lodestar beat me to it. 

Edited August 5 by Brat&Beer

[Brat&Beer]

 

[MantyWrestler]

2 hours ago, vegas492 said:

I wish it was that simple.  No one being worth the pick.

But that whole WR deal is a really complex issue.

On the surface, we didn't do much to reinforce that room when it was only Adams there.  

On the surface, those guys taken directly after weren't exactly "All World" and with hindsight, some of our picks are light years better.

But then there is this...adding quality to that room should have been a focus.  We had Rodgers.  Adams.  And nothing much else at WR or TE.  It should have been a focal point.

But then there is this, we had Rodgers.  And since we had him for a long time, we knew it would take time to gain his trust.  So the longer he played, I get why we didn't invest heavily because he'd use a 5'th rounder as much as he'd use a higher round pick. 

But then there is this.  We had Rodgers.  He should have been able to elevate "lesser" receivers.

So yeah, it is a deep issue.  No side is "right".  No side is "wrong".  It is what it is.  And now here we are with what, maybe 7 good receivers in camp?  It's ridiculous.  One has to ask, are they really that good?  Or, has the culture changed enough to where these younger guys are getting more and better opportunities?  The truth is probably some of both.  They are talented, probably moreso than the rounds where they were drafted.  And yes, they are getting better opportunities now than in the past.

And yet Rodgers would t throw to the rookies anyway… didn’t show up to all the mini camps to hall get them up to speed and pushed hard to keep stellar guys around like white Jesus. 

[Old Guy]

3 hours ago, Brat&Beer said:

 

I think the WR group is about as settled as any position. Watson, Doubs, Reed, Wicks and Melton seem locks. It comes down to if we are keeping 6 or 7. I think we go with six and it's a tossup between Heath and Dubois. 

Part of me would like us to keep 7, but we've got other positions where we'd have to cut somebody, perhaps even leave that position a little light if we did that. Not sure Dubois or Heath are worth that sacrifice elsewhere. 

I would say the one position I'd go lighter on based on the reports so far is quarterback. Doesn't seem as though there is any worry about exposing Clifford to waivers and bringing him back to practice squad. If we lose him, go get another stiff off the street. 

Edited August 6 by Old Guy

[R T]

8 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

I think the WR group is about as settled as any position. Watson, Doubs, Reed, Wicks and Melton seem locks. It comes down to if we are keeping 6 or 7. I think we go with six and it's a tossup between Heath and Dubois. 

Part of me would like us to keep 7, but we've got other positions where we'd have to cut somebody, perhaps even leave that position a little light if we did that. Not sure Dubois or Heath are worth that sacrifice elsewhere. 

I would say the one position I'd go lighter on based on the reports so far is quarterback. Doesn't seem as though there is any worry about exposing Clifford to waivers and bringing him back to practice squad. If we lose him, go get another stiff off the street. 

The number is probably 6 at WR, but 5 is probably as likely of a number as 7 is. 

[Refugee]

2 hours ago, Old Guy said:

I think the WR group is about as settled as any position. Watson, Doubs, Reed, Wicks and Melton seem locks. It comes down to if we are keeping 6 or 7. I think we go with six and it's a tossup between Heath and Dubois. 

Part of me would like us to keep 7, but we've got other positions where we'd have to cut somebody, perhaps even leave that position a little light if we did that. Not sure Dubois or Heath are worth that sacrifice elsewhere. 

I would say the one position I'd go lighter on based on the reports so far is quarterback. Doesn't seem as though there is any worry about exposing Clifford to waivers and bringing him back to practice squad. If we lose him, go get another stiff off the street. 

DuBose will get his shot because he’s healthy unlike last year but Heath has the inside track as a guy with real snaps and willingness to fight for balls and do the dirty work of it’s not coming his way. DuBose has to show he’s better in more ways than one if he wants to see the 53. 

[Mazrimiv]

11 hours ago, Old Guy said:

I think the WR group is about as settled as any position. Watson, Doubs, Reed, Wicks and Melton seem locks. It comes down to if we are keeping 6 or 7. I think we go with six and it's a tossup between Heath and Dubois. 

Part of me would like us to keep 7, but we've got other positions where we'd have to cut somebody, perhaps even leave that position a little light if we did that. Not sure Dubois or Heath are worth that sacrifice elsewhere. 

I would say the one position I'd go lighter on based on the reports so far is quarterback. Doesn't seem as though there is any worry about exposing Clifford to waivers and bringing him back to practice squad. If we lose him, go get another stiff off the street. 

Are Heath or DuBose going to show up on special teams?  I honestly don't know, but I would think they would need to if they are going to stick on the 53.  I'm not seeing much value in keeping a WR only type on the roster as WR6.

I'd be a little shocked to see 3 QB's on the 53.