53 Man Roster thread

[craig]

On 6/17/2024 at 8:25 AM, Mazrimiv said:

I never thought Dillon in the Deguara role made much sense based on what I've seen from Dillon.

I kinda disagree on this?  I'm not super sophisticated, so may not be seeing things wisely.  But, from what I've seen, Dillon is a very good blocker, better than Degaura.  Deguara was a willing blocker, and often executed; but he whiffed on some blocks, and I think after he added some of the weight/strength/mass in the pros, he was kinda top-heavy and wasn't that agile or flexible as a blocker.  I think Dillon is also willing, and while as a runner he runs too straight and high, as a blocker I think he bends and gets low much better than Deguara, and he's faster and quicker than Deguara.  So, I guess I'm thinking he might be as good or better than Deguara as a movement blocker, or to swing outside and get under a linebacker or safety?  I also think he's got better hands that Deguara.  Obviously after the early Deguara, they realized he had no value as a pass target, he was strictly a blocker and an occasional check-down guy.  But if Dillon was asked to do exactly the Deguara-role things, I think both his hands and his agility as a check-down receiver would be better, and his check-down YAC would be better than Deguara.  

I'm not arguing he's going to be anything great in that role.  Or that he'll actually be used in that role.  I'm not sophisticated enough to evaluate. 

As others have noted, I think "The Deguara role" is probably kinda dumb, useless, obsolete, and inefficient on the current roster.  Why use one of the 4 discretionary positions on a no-threat blocker-only Deguara-role guy when you could give those snaps to a much-more-threatening WR or TE?  And when the WR will do more to clear defenders out of the box than the blocking-Deguara will?  So yeah, I'm not really a fan of asking whether we should use Dillon, Pearson, Sims, or Tyler Davis in "the Deguara Role".  I'd suggest that none of those four will do as much to threaten the defense and create space as instead using Musgrave or Wicks or Doubs or Melton or Reed or Melton instead.  

If MLF insists on using "The Deguara role", I'm fine to defer, of course!  

[R T]

46 minutes ago, craig said:

I kinda disagree on this?  I'm not super sophisticated, so may not be seeing things wisely.  But, from what I've seen, Dillon is a very good blocker, better than Degaura.  Deguara was a willing blocker, and often executed; but he whiffed on some blocks, and I think after he added some of the weight/strength/mass in the pros, he was kinda top-heavy and wasn't that agile or flexible as a blocker.  I think Dillon is also willing, and while as a runner he runs too straight and high, as a blocker I think he bends and gets low much better than Deguara, and he's faster and quicker than Deguara.  So, I guess I'm thinking he might be as good or better than Deguara as a movement blocker, or to swing outside and get under a linebacker or safety?  I also think he's got better hands that Deguara.  Obviously after the early Deguara, they realized he had no value as a pass target, he was strictly a blocker and an occasional check-down guy.  But if Dillon was asked to do exactly the Deguara-role things, I think both his hands and his agility as a check-down receiver would be better, and his check-down YAC would be better than Deguara.  

I'm not arguing he's going to be anything great in that role.  Or that he'll actually be used in that role.  I'm not sophisticated enough to evaluate. 

As others have noted, I think "The Deguara role" is probably kinda dumb, useless, obsolete, and inefficient on the current roster.  Why use one of the 4 discretionary positions on a no-threat blocker-only Deguara-role guy when you could give those snaps to a much-more-threatening WR or TE?  And when the WR will do more to clear defenders out of the box than the blocking-Deguara will?  So yeah, I'm not really a fan of asking whether we should use Dillon, Pearson, Sims, or Tyler Davis in "the Deguara Role".  I'd suggest that none of those four will do as much to threaten the defense and create space as instead using Musgrave or Wicks or Doubs or Melton or Reed or Melton instead.  

If MLF insists on using "The Deguara role", I'm fine to defer, of course!  

But it is not any of those things, it actually is kind of a staple for MLF's offense.

[Uffdaswede]

4 hours ago, R T said:

But it is not any of those things, it actually is kind of a staple for MLF's offense.

Deguara’s targets from ‘21 on were 33, 15 and then 8 last season. MLF has moved on from that particular idea. I see no reason why he might not try it again if the right player came along. There just aren’t enough Kyle Juszczyk’s to go around.

Matt had a couple of H Back/TE types when he was OC for the Titans. I don’t see anything but traditional TEs on our roster right now. 

[R T]

1 hour ago, Uffdaswede said:

Deguara’s targets from ‘21 on were 33, 15 and then 8 last season. MLF has moved on from that particular idea. I see no reason why he might not try it again if the right player came along. There just aren’t enough Kyle Juszczyk’s to go around.

Matt had a couple of H Back/TE types when he was OC for the Titans. I don’t see anything but traditional TEs on our roster right now. 

You didn't look very closely; they have a player very similar to the Juszczyk prototype.  

[Uffdaswede]

6 hours ago, R T said:

You didn't look very closely; they have a player very similar to the Juszczyk prototype.  

Is that Sims?

[R T]

2 hours ago, Uffdaswede said:

Is that Sims?

First, before this goes wildly off the tracks like most conversations do on this forum, my original comment was that the 'Deguara role' is a staple in the MLF's and not going anywhere. Who fills that roll is probably still a little up in the air, but a combination of Kraft, Sims, Davis and Pearson likely fill that role this season. 

As for the one most similar to Juszczyk coming out of college, that would be Pearson.

Juszczyk - 6.012/248 - bench 24 - vertical 37 - broad jump 10.01 - 20-yard split 2.75 - 40/4.71

Pearson - 6.023/249 - bench 30 - vertical 31 - broad jump 10.00 - 20-yard split 2.69 - 40/4.8   

Not claiming Pearson is Juszczyk, only that there is that type on the roster. 

[Old Guy]

12 hours ago, Uffdaswede said:

Deguara’s targets from ‘21 on were 33, 15 and then 8 last season. MLF has moved on from that particular idea. I see no reason why he might not try it again if the right player came along. There just aren’t enough Kyle Juszczyk’s to go around.

Matt had a couple of H Back/TE types when he was OC for the Titans. I don’t see anything but traditional TEs on our roster right now. 

Has he moved on from it or did he not have anybody who could do it well?

 

Edited June 28 by Old Guy

[craig]

30 minutes ago, R T said:

....As for the one most similar to Juszczyk coming out of college, that would be Pearson.

Juszczyk - 6.012/248 - bench 24 - vertical 37 - broad jump 10.01 - 20-yard split 2.75 - 40/4.71

Pearson - 6.023/249 - bench 30 - vertical 31 - broad jump 10.00 - 20-yard split 2.69 - 40/4.8   

Dillon - 6.03/247 - bench 23 - vertical 41 - broad jump 10.11 - 20-yard split 2.69 - 40/4.53

Not claiming Dillon is Pearson, but his body-size seems Pearson-similar.  If body type is what you're matching, and you figure Pearson fits the type, wouldn't Dillon also fit by analogy?  

Dillon has two inches on Juszczyk, but otherwise his combine numbers seem Juszczyk-similar, other than more speed and better jumps.

As my earlier post suggested, I'm not sure how much MLF will call plays with Deguara-role players?  RT correctly notes that Deguara-role plays have been an MLF staple.  But nothing necessarily stays the same?  As the roster changes with different players with different skill sets, MLF has different options for designing productive plays; so what was a staple in past may hypothetically be less staple in future? 

Deguara's snaps-usage has declined from 33% - 24% - 17% over the past three years.  I don't know what, if anything, to conclude.  Does that reflect that MLF used Deguara-role plays only half as much in 23 as he had in 21?  Or did he call just as many Deguara-role plays, but increasingly replaced Deguara with Kraft or Sims for Deguara-role plays?  I don't know.   (Pearson was used for only 1% of snaps, so he didn't steal significant Deguara-role snaps.).  If Deguara-role plays declined, will it further decline, maybe to 10% or less?  Or will it rebound back into the 20's and 30's %?  Beats me!

But yeah, as RT notes, usage of Deguara-role players has been a staple in past.  If that is true moving forward, as my earlier post suggested, I'm not sure why Dillon might not have the physical dimensions, the willingness to block, and the check-down-receiver aptitude to fill that role as well or better than Deguara or Pearson?  

[AlexGreen#20]

On 6/28/2024 at 9:22 AM, craig said:

Dillon - 6.03/247 - bench 23 - vertical 41 - broad jump 10.11 - 20-yard split 2.69 - 40/4.53

Not claiming Dillon is Pearson, but his body-size seems Pearson-similar.  If body type is what you're matching, and you figure Pearson fits the type, wouldn't Dillon also fit by analogy?  

Dillon has two inches on Juszczyk, but otherwise his combine numbers seem Juszczyk-similar, other than more speed and better jumps.

As my earlier post suggested, I'm not sure how much MLF will call plays with Deguara-role players?  RT correctly notes that Deguara-role plays have been an MLF staple.  But nothing necessarily stays the same?  As the roster changes with different players with different skill sets, MLF has different options for designing productive plays; so what was a staple in past may hypothetically be less staple in future? 

Deguara's snaps-usage has declined from 33% - 24% - 17% over the past three years.  I don't know what, if anything, to conclude.  Does that reflect that MLF used Deguara-role plays only half as much in 23 as he had in 21?  Or did he call just as many Deguara-role plays, but increasingly replaced Deguara with Kraft or Sims for Deguara-role plays?  I don't know.   (Pearson was used for only 1% of snaps, so he didn't steal significant Deguara-role snaps.).  If Deguara-role plays declined, will it further decline, maybe to 10% or less?  Or will it rebound back into the 20's and 30's %?  Beats me!

But yeah, as RT notes, usage of Deguara-role players has been a staple in past.  If that is true moving forward, as my earlier post suggested, I'm not sure why Dillon might not have the physical dimensions, the willingness to block, and the check-down-receiver aptitude to fill that role as well or better than Deguara or Pearson?  

Deguara was getting 33% of snaps because he was not only getting the H-Back snaps but was also getting some true Y snaps. 

He lost pretty much all of his Y snaps. 

His H-Back snaps are going to get split between Musgrave, Kraft, and Sims, as they were as last year advanced on. 

[OneTwoSixFive]

Wide receivers.

Christian Watson, Romeo Doubs, Jayden Reed, Dontayvion Wicks, Bo Melton, Malik Heath. Put them in order of who should be the most valuable player going forward and who is the least valuable.

I'd put them as Watson first (yes he needs to stay healthy), then Reed and Melton equal second, then Wicks and Doubs equal third, then Heath. This is not to disparage guys like Wicks and Doubs. You could put either of them as a no.2 receiver on many teams squads and they would be more than fine. Even Heath, who I put last, is better than almost any other 6th best receiver on a different team.

Are other posters as high on Melton, or do they feel Wicks should be higher.............or Watson lower. However it all pans out in the future, the Packers have unbelievable strength in depth here.

[ThatJerkDave]

3 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Wide receivers.

Christian Watson, Romeo Doubs, Jayden Reed, Dontayvion Wicks, Bo Melton, Malik Heath. Put them in order of who should be the most valuable player going forward and who is the least valuable.

I'd put them as Watson first (yes he needs to stay healthy), then Reed and Melton equal second, then Wicks and Doubs equal third, then Heath. This is not to disparage guys like Wicks and Doubs. You could put either of them as a no.2 receiver on many teams squads and they would be more than fine. Even Heath, who I put last, is better than almost any other 6th best receiver on a different team.

Are other posters as high on Melton, or do they feel Wicks should be higher.............or Watson lower. However it all pans out in the future, the Packers have unbelievable strength in depth here.

Watson>Wicks>Reed>Doubs  BIG GAP  the rest.  I still don't think there is much of a difference between Heath, Melton, and Toure, talent wise.  DuBose, Hicks, McGough, and Stanley are pretty much unseen and I would like to see at least a preseason game or two before passing any kind of judgement.  

[Old Guy]

9 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

Watson>Wicks>Reed>Doubs  BIG GAP  the rest.  I still don't think there is much of a difference between Heath, Melton, and Toure, talent wise.  DuBose, Hicks, McGough, and Stanley are pretty much unseen and I would like to see at least a preseason game or two before passing any kind of judgement.  

I'm not sure if you are selling Reed and Doubs short or just have an extremely high opinion of Watson and Wicks. 

[ThatJerkDave]

6 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

I'm not sure if you are selling Reed and Doubs short or just have an extremely high opinion of Watson and Wicks. 

Watson changes the defense just by being on the field.  He is a size and speed nightmare to cover, and they have to account for it.   There aren't many players like that in the league, and we have one of them.  

Watch some of Wicks' highlights.  He looks a lot like Davante Adams before he put it all together.  I think if he continues to develop, he will be a big time player.  

[Mazrimiv]

2 hours ago, Old Guy said:

I'm not sure if you are selling Reed and Doubs short or just have an extremely high opinion of Watson and Wicks. 

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. He didn't say there was a big gap between those 4.  You could put those 4 in virtually any order and be able to make a reasonable argument for it.

[ThatJerkDave]

3 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. He didn't say there was a big gap between those 4.  You could put those 4 in virtually any order and be able to make a reasonable argument for it.

I am biased in that Christian Watson is my favorite player.  And I would put him easily ahead of the other three.  But just like I thought Greg Jennings was our best WR in the mid-2000s, Driver, Jones and Finley were all capable of being the number 1 target, depending on the game.