Random Packer News & Notes

[Toddfather]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Do they make that trade if Ryan Fitzpatrick is their QB, yes or no?  They're grabbing Hill to make sure Tua succeeds.

I still think they make the trade, but who knows. 

[AlexGreen#20]

10 hours ago, CWood21 said:

And that's probably the case.  But I'd argue that's probably the same with every non-QB, OT, or EDGE position.  And I'd probably lump IDL into that same territory, although there are very few elite IDL prospects come out.  I think for teams, you could easily argue that WR is in that next tier.

Yes

[craig]

19 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Bad teams pick early.  Good teams pick late.  You chose to use the argument that WRs aren't taken in the top 3.  I didn't.  If you want to re-evaluate the picks in the latter third of the draft, what percentage of those picks were used on WRs?

The latter question is perhaps most pertinent to the Packers! 

In terms of what the Packers value, I'd be a little hesitant to judge too confidently based on recent Gute draft picks.  With one 1st and one 2nd round pick, it takes a lot of years to make a big-enough sample size to be statistically meaningful.  1st/2nd rounders are VERY limited resources distributed over 22 starting positions.  It may hypothetically be that the Packers' valuation of a particular position group is no different from most of the league?  But that the right D-lineman or OT just hasn't happened  to be there at the right time?   BPA-man TT went years without drafting high on OT; then suddenly Bulaga and Sherrod back-to-back. Just worked out that way.  

[craig]

21 hours ago, CWood21 said:

And that's probably the case.  But I'd argue that's probably the same with every non-QB, OT, or EDGE position.  And I'd probably lump IDL into that same territory, although there are very few elite IDL prospects come out.  I think for teams, you could easily argue that WR is in that next tier.

As Alex said, yes.  

I'd figure that "premium" position is more relevant in the top handful of picks when you've maybe got a volume of choices who are elite at their respective positions.  But by the second half of round 1, you're always selecting among variably imperfect guys.  A guy at a tier-one position who's imperfect?  A perhaps-more-elite player but at a tier-two position?  More hypothetical upside but more risk?  A guy with perhaps more talent but more injury concerns?  A guy who might end up being something, but will take a while to get there, and will burn a chunk of his rookie-cheap contract before he's really good, and very shortly after he becomes really good you'll need to pay him accordingly?   Sometimes drafting a guy who projects to be very good, but at a tier-two position, is appropriate in the back-half of round 1.  

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, craig said:

In terms of what the Packers value, I'd be a little hesitant to judge too confidently based on recent Gute draft picks.  With one 1st and one 2nd round pick, it takes a lot of years to make a big-enough sample size to be statistically meaningful.  1st/2nd rounders are VERY limited resources distributed over 22 starting positions.  It may hypothetically be that the Packers' valuation of a particular position group is no different from most of the league?  But that the right D-lineman or OT just hasn't happened  to be there at the right time?   BPA-man TT went years without drafting high on OT; then suddenly Bulaga and Sherrod back-to-back. Just worked out that way.  

I wouldn't say we're going to be 100% confident in knowing Gute's tendencies, but through four drafts we can get a reasonably strong idea of his thinking.  I think you'd argue that four out of his five FRPs were used on "premium" position players.  The only one that wasn't was Darnell Savage, which was acquired via the Saints' pick.  With his second pick, he's shown a willingness to draft a "second tier" position.  Ted Thompson clearly put a high premium on positional value.  I think Gute does as as well just not to the extreme that TT went.  TT was also heavily influenced by West Coast prospects, particularly out of the Pac-12.  Gute seems to like his SEC and Big 10 players heavily.

[NFLGURU]

It will be interesting to see Gutes approach to this draft.

Is he going all in for the next year or two with a WR haul?,  or is he looking long term and going BPA for these first couple of picks and hitting the WR in rd 2 and mid rounds.

While the internet goes wild with WRs, Im just not sure Gute changes his standards by choosing WRs in rd 1.  Rodgers situation definitely changes things though,    Theres no question this team needs WRs, but if quality players at other positions are there it will be interesting to see where Gute goes.             

   

[NFLGURU]

57 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

 I think Gute does as as well just not to the extreme that TT went.  TT was also heavily influenced by West Coast prospects, particularly out of the Pac-12.  Gute seems to like his SEC and Big 10 players heavily.

Agree, I think it has to do with the quality of play.  A guy like Stokes in the SEC had played against the top WRs in the country week in and week out.  Jefferson, Chase, Ridley, Jeudy, Ruggs, and even in practice against Pickens.  

The Big 10 is a quality conference as well, and the transition weather-wise isnt as bad, not a huge factor but something to consider.     

[Old Guy]

19 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

It will be interesting to see Gutes approach to this draft.

Is he going all in for the next year or two with a WR haul?,  or is he looking long term and going BPA for these first couple of picks and hitting the WR in rd 2 and mid rounds.

While the internet goes wild with WRs, Im just not sure Gute changes his standards by choosing WRs in rd 1.  Rodgers situation definitely changes things though,    Theres no question this team needs WRs, but if quality players at other positions are there it will be interesting to see where Gute goes.             

   

I don't see the correlation to 'going all in' and having to get a 'haul' at WR. Yes, we need more talent in that room, but WR's generally do not do well in Green Bay because of Rodgers needing to trust them before throwing to them on a regular basis. 

Keeping Rodgers means we are all in. Reaching for any position because you are thin at that position is the best way to set yourself up for failure. 

[vegas492]

44 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

It will be interesting to see Gutes approach to this draft.

Is he going all in for the next year or two with a WR haul?,  or is he looking long term and going BPA for these first couple of picks and hitting the WR in rd 2 and mid rounds.

While the internet goes wild with WRs, Im just not sure Gute changes his standards by choosing WRs in rd 1.  Rodgers situation definitely changes things though,    Theres no question this team needs WRs, but if quality players at other positions are there it will be interesting to see where Gute goes.             

   

Just me thinking, which is dangerous, but.....

No doubt Rodgers is watching film of WR's.  If he loves one, Gute is gonna have to do all he can to secure that guy or guys.

No way do you lose Adams and not have Rodgers involved in the draft process regarding WR.

[vegas492]

23 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

I don't see the correlation to 'going all in' and having to get a 'haul' at WR. Yes, we need more talent in that room, but WR's generally do not do well in Green Bay because of Rodgers needing to trust them before throwing to them on a regular basis. 

Keeping Rodgers means we are all in. Reaching for any position because you are thin at that position is the best way to set yourself up for failure. 

Rodgers may have no other option than to throw to a rookie.  And let's not forget, he did throw to MVS as a rookie.  Mostly out of necessity, but it has happened.

Guess I feel like getting Rodgers to ink his deal, while knowing Adams was probably gone, means that Rodgers is going to have a say in which WR's are drafted.  And the club will need to maneuver the draft to acquire the guys that he likes.

I'm not saying this is the right move for the franchise, but that is kind of the corner we are now backed into.

[Old Guy]

1 minute ago, vegas492 said:

Rodgers may have no other option than to throw to a rookie.  And let's not forget, he did throw to MVS as a rookie.  Mostly out of necessity, but it has happened.

Guess I feel like getting Rodgers to ink his deal, while knowing Adams was probably gone, means that Rodgers is going to have a say in which WR's are drafted.  And the club will need to maneuver the draft to acquire the guys that he likes.

I'm not saying this is the right move for the franchise, but that is kind of the corner we are now backed into.

This would be shocking to me and a horrible precedent. Rodgers needs to go out a 'recruit' a vet who wants to come to Green Bay and play with him for a discount. 

[vegas492]

Just now, Old Guy said:

This would be shocking to me and a horrible precedent. Rodgers needs to go out a 'recruit' a vet who wants to come to Green Bay and play with him for a discount. 

Dude.  It is what we signed up for last year.  And again this year.  Not saying it is right or wrong, but we brought in Randall Cobb to appease him.  It shouldn't shock you if Rodgers is going to have a say in which WR's he likes in the draft.  With what we are paying him, he should be flying to private workouts and throwing balls to those kids.

Obviously recruitment isn't working...yet.

[vegas492]

2 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

This would be shocking to me and a horrible precedent. Rodgers needs to go out a 'recruit' a vet who wants to come to Green Bay and play with him for a discount. 

To expand...why would it be horrible for a QB to identify who he likes at WR in the draft???

Gute's track record there (WR) isn't exactly stellar.  Moore, MVS, ESB, Rogers.  I know we haven't invested a premium pick in a WR since he started drafting, but maybe Rodgers is someone who should be listened to regarding drafting WR's.  

[Packer_ESP]

4 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

To expand...why would it be horrible for a QB to identify who he likes at WR in the draft???

Because good player is not equal to good scout

[Old Guy]

1 minute ago, vegas492 said:

To expand...why would it be horrible for a QB to identify who he likes at WR in the draft???

Gute's track record there (WR) isn't exactly stellar.  Moore, MVS, ESB, Rogers.  I know we haven't invested a premium pick in a WR since he started drafting, but maybe Rodgers is someone who should be listened to regarding drafting WR's.  

It's one thing if he identifies them. It's another if we get a guy based on his recommendation rather than what the scouting team says is the best prospect. 

There is a difference between input and final say. Your original post was suggesting we'd get the guy he wanted and maneuver to do so, that is wrong. He doesn't scout for a living. For all we know he doesn't know that much about many of the guys coming out. 

People have different jobs in an organization for a reason. His is not personnel, its playing quarterback, which he's top of his profession at.