Random Packer News & Notes

[AlexGreen#20]

Just now, Sandy said:

I guess I don't see the point. GMs value WRs enough to trade lots of draft picks and give lots of money to them. Teams that have invested heavily in the position have been rewarded with deep playoff runs in recent years.

It's not exactly a hot take that WRs are considered a premium position by a lot of team decision makers in the league.

It absolutely is a hot take. 

There hasn't been a top 3 pick spent on a WR since 2007. 

[Sandy]

6 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

It absolutely is a hot take. 

There hasn't been a top 3 pick spent on a WR since 2007. 

4 of the top 6 non-QB salaries this season are WRs. 

9 of the 23 non-QBs making 20m per season are WRs.

WR is absolutely a premium position in the NFL.

*Info from Spotrac

Edited April 7, 2022 by Sandy

[Dubz41]

4 minutes ago, Sandy said:

4 of the top 6 non-QB salaries this season are WRs. 

9 of the 23 non-QBs making 20m per season are WRs.

WR is absolutely a premium position in the NFL.

*Info from Spotrac

Cherry picking.  This was NOT true just two months ago.

[AlexGreen#20]

9 minutes ago, Sandy said:

4 of the top 6 non-QB salaries this season are WRs. 

9 of the 23 non-QBs making 20m per season are WRs.

WR is absolutely a premium position in the NFL.

*Info from Spotrac

Because the other elite talents weren't hitting walk years this year. 

[Packer_ESP]

16 minutes ago, Sandy said:

4 of the top 6 non-QB salaries this season are WRs. 

9 of the 23 non-QBs making 20m per season are WRs.

WR is absolutely a premium position in the NFL.

*Info from Spotrac

Besides the recency bias that was already mentioned, you have to look at guarantees. Also from Spotrac:

• Only 2 of the top 10 non-qbs with the highest guarantees are WR, considerably down from your 4 of 6 figure
• 7 of the 33 non-qb players with 50M+ guaranteed are WR, a much lower figure than your 9 out of 23

Besides, 4 of the top 6 non qb salaries are WRs if you look at cash in hand, which is obviously heavily influenced by the signing bonuses of this off-season. If you go by cap hit, it's 1 only one WR among the top 10 non-qb cap hits.

[Sandy]

11 minutes ago, Dubz41 said:

Cherry picking.  This was NOT true just two months ago.

 

Taking a random flat number like 20m isnt cherry picking.  I could pick another number at random but that one happened to be near the end of the first page of player salaries on spotrac.

6 of those 9 WRs were making those salaries before this offseason. It isn't a new trend, although having a WR being the first non-QB make 30m is new.

5 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Because the other elite talents weren't hitting walk years this year. 

The NFL evolves. One could argue that WRs are coveted more than ever right now,  based on the actual data. Or you could continue voicing an opinion with no facts or stats to back it up.

[Sandy]

2 minutes ago, Packer_ESP said:

Besides the recency bias that was already mentioned, you have to look at guarantees. Also from Spotrac:

• Only 2 of the top 10 non-qbs with the highest guarantees are WR, considerably down from your 4 of 6 figure
• 7 of the 33 non-qb players with 50M+ guaranteed are WR, a much lower figure than your 9 out of 23

Besides, 4 of the top 6 non qb salaries are WRs if you look at cash in hand, which is obviously heavily influenced by the signing bonuses of this off-season. If you go by cap hit, it's 1 only one WR among the top 10 non-qb cap hits.

I appreciate the extra context added.  Even with that data, it tells me that WR is still a premium position in the NFL. Not saying it's #2 right after QB, but along with Edge and T it's one of the top positions in the NFL.

The original point I was arguing against from the prior page is that it's treated by GMs around the league the same as non-edge linebackers and that it's a non-premium position, for context.

[vegas492]

11 hours ago, ThatJerkDave said:

I think my posts seem to lean toward "don't worry" but I am mostly commenting about taking a WR in the first round.  It very well could be true that the best player is a WR.  I absolutely agree with the bolded.  I am just saying that don't panic if "pick your flavor WR" is available at 22 and we pass, and said player goes before 28.  The draft isn't over on day 1.  We have 5 top 100 picks, and 11 picks overall.  

 

I also am probably a little higher on a couple of our guys than most.  I will acknowledge that the room is not ready, yet.  But take a look at Randall Cobb and Allen Lazard:

The biggest question about Cobb is whether or not he is healthy.  The last time he was fully healthy was 2019 with Dallas, and he had 800 yards on 83 targets.  He had his highest yards per reception in a while, but he has increased his catch percentage in the last two seasons.  He has also been above his career average in yards per catch in each of his last three seasons.  

Allen Lazard is quietly putting up pretty good numbers.  He is just not flashy, and isn't getting the targets because Davante was so good.  Look at Lazard compared to James Jones.  Very similar yards per catch, with a higher catch percentage.  Is Allen Lazard a superstar in the making? No, I don't think so.  Can we probably count on him to put up 6-800 yards given more targets? I do think so.

Lazard:  https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LazaAl00.htm

Jones:  https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JoneJa04.htm

Cobb:  https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CobbRa00.htm

If we can get 60ish receptions from both Cobb and Lazard, I think we have a pretty decent base for a committee of WRs.  This won't be the 2011 group, but that doesn't mean there is no hope.  

There's 17 games now.  push your receptions and yards up some.

And with 17 games, what's the over/under for how many Cobb will miss due to injury?  I put that number at 7.

[vegas492]

8 hours ago, Sandy said:

I guess I don't see the point. GMs value WRs enough to trade lots of draft picks and give lots of money to them. Teams that have invested heavily in the position have been rewarded with deep playoff runs in recent years.

It's not exactly a hot take that WRs are considered a premium position by a lot of team decision makers in the league.

Not disputing your take.

Am asking this....if Carr wasn't the QB for Raiders, do they trade for 'Vante?  

Anyone thinking Hill make Miami a contender? 

This has been a very curious off-season.

@Outpost31 has opined a few times that teams should draft a QB high, get the most out of him on that contract, then trade the QB before paying franchise money.  Get the picks, start over.

It's kind of looking that way for WR's right now.  Some times will value them for their own reasons, other teams take the best years at decent contract numbers, then move on.  

[Sandy]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

Not disputing your take.

Am asking this....if Carr wasn't the QB for Raiders, do they trade for 'Vante?  

Anyone thinking Hill make Miami a contender? 

This has been a very curious off-season.

@Outpost31 has opined a few times that teams should draft a QB high, get the most out of him on that contract, then trade the QB before paying franchise money.  Get the picks, start over.

It's kind of looking that way for WR's right now.  Some times will value them for their own reasons, other teams take the best years at decent contract numbers, then move on.  

That's a good point, or at least a really interesting rabbit hole to dive into. It's not surprising that teams with elite WRs on rookie contracts have found playoff success recently, highlighted by Kupp and Chase but also Godwin, Hill, and Deebo just off the top of my head.

Perhaps it might not be so much QB or WR as it is all premium positions. If a SB team needs a top QB, WR1, LT, Edge1, NT and CB1 (all the premium positions by my opinion), then I'd imagine some of them have to be on rookie deals in order to have the rest of the roster be good enough to actually contend.

[ThatJerkDave]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

There's 17 games now.  push your receptions and yards up some.

And with 17 games, what's the over/under for how many Cobb will miss due to injury?  I put that number at 7.

I would take that under.  I think 4.  But if we are in the playoffs and rest players, he definitely is one that is resting.

[CWood21]

11 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

The GMs of their non-incumbent teams?

I think that's a bit of a fallacy there.  Just because their respective teams don't spend big on WRs doesn't mean that other franchises don't put premium on WRs.

[CWood21]

10 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

It absolutely is a hot take. 

There hasn't been a top 3 pick spent on a WR since 2007. 

That seems like an arbitrary cutoff to me, although I'd love to hear your reasoning behind it.  The only positions that have seen multiple picks taken inside the top 3 since 2015 are QB (13), DL (2), and EDGE (5).  Are you going to argue that RB is a more valuable position then WR simply because Saquon Barkley went #2 overall in 2018?

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

It's kind of looking that way for WR's right now.  Some times will value them for their own reasons, other teams take the best years at decent contract numbers, then move on.  

WRs are dependent on their QB.  QBs aren't dependent on their WRs.  You pay QBs.

[Scoremore]

2 hours ago, vegas492 said:

Not disputing your take.

Am asking this....if Carr wasn't the QB for Raiders, do they trade for 'Vante?  

Anyone thinking Hill make Miami a contender? 

This has been a very curious off-season.

@Outpost31 has opined a few times that teams should draft a QB high, get the most out of him on that contract, then trade the QB before paying franchise money.  Get the picks, start over.

It's kind of looking that way for WR's right now.  Some times will value them for their own reasons, other teams take the best years at decent contract numbers, then move on.  

Yep that's what I'm thinking.  Pay scale for WR's has become out of hand.  Not only that but look at the draft capital teams are willing to give up to trade for these guys.  At this point I'd be inclined to keep drafting WR's and keep the position stocked.  Trade them off for more picks rinse and repeat.  QB's on the other hand are just too hard to find.  Not only that takes awhile for them to adjust to the game and become good.  Rookie QB's just don't work.  Pay the QB draft and trade the WR's.  Way I'd play it.