Veteran WR Options

[Pckfn23]

Lol because it would be unfortunate to desperately need to replenish the WR room and have 2 first round picks to do just that...and then miss out on getting the guy the Packers locate as the guy they need. Or the one year we have 2 1st rounders there not be one guy the Packers locate as being worthy of one of those picks at WR.

That would be a bummer, no?

A. I don't believe we desperately need anyone, not after signing Watkins.
B. We will never know if the Packers identified a guy and then missed out on that guy, so I can't get worked up over something I don't know about.
C. I personally don't see a receiver in this draft that would be deemed a "can't miss" guy, even though that term doesn't truly exist.
D. I would be more inclined to taking several shots at WR over the first 3 rounds than putting all our eggs in 1 basket.

yes i will be dissapointed if in a draft where we possess 2 1s we leave without a guy worthy of being drafted in round one.

Does this feeling of disappointment make me a bad fan?

When the talk is in generalities, yes. Who is this guy? It's a setup to be angry unless the Packers trade up for a WR.

A. To say we don't desperately need another WR or 2 in this upcoming draft after signing Watkins is wishful thinking. Sammy is good when he is on the field but I don't think he has been healthy for an entire season in a while.

You misunderstand the post. It specifically says anyone. There isn't any one receiver in this draft we desperately need. We need a receiver, no doubt.

[Yoop]

We stocked the cupboard in 2018. Though the talent wasn't amazing, we even found a mediocre #2 in MVS was too expensive for us this year.

this is the problem, and it actually started two years prior, instead of taking a 3 player shot in the mid rounds of supremely raw talent we should have brought in someone that needed less D%D to pair with Adams.

why people here look at a guy like MVS as a #2 here baffles me, he wont be looked as that by Minny or any where else, he finally started to develop some chemistry with Rodgers and was paid like a more polished receiver, what they got was a fast guy that catches 50% of targeted throws, we wouldn't have given him 10 mil even if we had it.

the Cupboard was near empty in 018, it's worse today, we signed a talented player in Watkins, but he hasn't played a full season but once and far less the last couple seasons, who can we count on? Lazard? he wouldn't be a #2 on half the teams in the league either, we need a influx of talent that don't require 3 years of coaching up.

we always have positional needs, but there isn't a position on this team as weak as WR, not even close, could we use a safety, you betcha, could we use a DT, of course, LT, Lber, edge, my point is there are always positions we would like to improve with a high draft pick, but imo each year there are positional priority's, and as best as possible those positions have to be fixed, or you become dis functional.

easy to say run the ball and play stout defense, but that is far harder to do then I think people think, I always go back to that guy McCarthy, his point that the less plays it takes to score, the less chance for a mis cue makes sense, times do change, we run more now then we have in years, but balance to me makes us less predictable.

rambling......

[go pak go]

We stocked the cupboard in 2018. Though the talent wasn't amazing, we even found a mediocre #2 in MVS was too expensive for us this year.

this is the problem, and it actually started two years prior, instead of taking a 3 player shot in the mid rounds of supremely raw talent we should have brought in someone that needed less D%D to pair with Adams.

why people here look at a guy like MVS as a #2 here baffles me, he wont be looked as that by Minny or any where else, he finally started to develop some chemistry with Rodgers and was paid like a more polished receiver, what they got was a fast guy that catches 50% of targeted throws, we wouldn't have given him 10 mil even if we had it.

the Cupboard was near empty in 018, it's worse today, we signed a talented player in Watkins, but he hasn't played a full season but once and far less the last couple seasons, who can we count on? Lazard? he wouldn't be a #2 on half the teams in the league either, we need a influx of talent that don't require 3 years of coaching up.

we always have positional needs, but there isn't a position on this team as weak as WR, not even close, could we use a safety, you betcha, could we use a DT, of course, LT, Lber, edge, my point is there are always positions we would like to improve with a high draft pick, but imo each year there are positional priority's, and as best as possible those positions have to be fixed, or you become dis functional.

easy to say run the ball and play stout defense, but that is far harder to do then I think people think, I always go back to that guy McCarthy, his point that the less plays it takes to score, the less chance for a mis cue makes sense, times do change, we run more now then we have in years, but balance to me makes us less predictable.

rambling......

yeah and i don't understand your rant. Like at all.

We wouldn't be able to afford a competent 2018 draft pick on his 2nd contract based on how we are building our team. My whole point is we couldn't afford $10MM. What makes us think we could afford someone better at $12MM?

We certainly could strike a deal to push money way out, but our WR issue is more of a roster makeup issue (by allocating resources on the defense and run game) than it is on not drafting a WR after 2016 issue.

And I am okay with it. I love having a top end defense and top end running game on paper and then relying on our MVP QB to make our 20th to 25th pass catchers a top 15 to top 10 passing unit.

This is the closest to the "Patriots way" and even early "Russel Wilson Seahawks way" we have ever been. It is why I am just no wringing my hands too hard. Because this type of team has won it many times before. The biggest thing is our defense needs to be as good in real life as it is on paper.

[Drj820]

I would say one difference is people who think drafting a cluster of WRs in the 5th round and beyond is "stocking the cupboard" and those who think that is throwing paint on the wall and hoping/praying some of it sticks.

[salmar80]

Yeah this whole debate really comes down to the two categories of people on the board. people who think Watkins, Lazard, and some mid rounders are a group that can be competent and win a SB

or people who say, whoooaaa Watkins is a nice hire but he is a total mystery, Lazard sucks, and we need more fire power to win a super bowl.

People who think Watkins and Lazard shouldnt be relied apon want to take desperate measures in the draft, people who have hope in those two are less concerned.

It seems.

Not at all. And it’s actually been incredibly clearly articulated.

The debate is between people who are under the impression that there will be one clear automatic, instant impact WR identifiable in advance worth multiple picks/ trading up for…

And those who recognize that there is a spectrum and depth of WR talent available in this draft which might favor using multiple picks in multiple players rather than using multiple picks to secure one player.

There's also an illusion that IF we trade up for a WR, that would automatically mean that WR is an instant starter and savior... It's as if the trading up in itself would solve the position, regardless of the player drafted. It's pretty telling that the folks favoring a trade up fail to identify who the target should be.

I view the situation differently: LaFleur is an excellent coach at utilizing talent at hand, and is willing to mold his scheme according to talent at hand.

We need to add talent at the WR position, but there just isn't a faultless, ready-to-rule as WR1 in this draft class. If trading up for the promised one isn't an option, what we can do instead, is target players that are good fits for roles that make this O scheme go. A quick slot, a speedster, a better version of Ervin as a sweep specialist, a returner... Those can be had from low 1st round to later rounds.

[go pak go]

I would say one difference is people who think drafting a cluster of WRs in the 5th round and beyond is "stocking the cupboard" and those who think that is throwing paint on the wall and hoping/praying some of it sticks.

And I would say the same thing for those thinking a first round pick solves all simply because it is a first round pick rather than actually liking specific players.

I don't have a problem if there are actually players talked about. But because there is a lack of "clear players that are liked in this draft", you are instead just going back to generalities of top 15 pick.

We should be beyond the generality of top end pick by this point in the draft analysis. Those are fall and winter conversations. Now we know what we have. And honestly all of them have things that make me not terribly excited to trade up for. Especially when I think the 2nd day versions may be just as exciting. Which is why I lean more to the "two 2nd day picks" rather than using a top end pick on a WR.

[Drj820]

Indeed. I would be all for trading up for the guy we really want. But it's possible there isn't one, or the one goes way too early.

if it plays out like this, that will be unfortunate for us...but you are correct that it would not be wise to "reach" or force the issue on a warm body, if we do not love the player.

[mention]go pak go[/mention]

if i am being accused of hoping to draft someone in the top 15 just because that will be a magic pill to heal our WR room, please refer to this post I previously made when dialoging with Salmar.

[Labrev]

Yeah this whole debate really comes down to the two categories of people on the board. people who think Watkins, Lazard, and some mid rounders are a group that can be competent and win a SB

or people who say, whoooaaa Watkins is a nice hire but he is a total mystery, Lazard sucks, and we need more fire power to win a super bowl.

People who think Watkins and Lazard shouldnt be relied apon want to take desperate measures in the draft, people who have hope in those two are less concerned.

It seems.

Not at all. And it’s actually been incredibly clearly articulated.

The debate is between people who are under the impression that there will be one clear automatic, instant impact WR identifiable in advance worth multiple picks/ trading up for…

And those who recognize that there is a spectrum and depth of WR talent available in this draft which might favor using multiple picks in multiple players rather than using multiple picks to secure one player.

On top of that, I don't think there's a single, solitary soul here who thinks that coming away with just "mid rounders"<sic> at WR from the draft is good enough -- not even the people who do not like the idea of trading up in Round 1.

Like, literally everyone here agrees we need to draft WR help within the first couple rounds. I'm one of the people who is the least gung-ho about the receiver position and even I think that.

[Yoop]

We stocked the cupboard in 2018. Though the talent wasn't amazing, we even found a mediocre #2 in MVS was too expensive for us this year.

this is the problem, and it actually started two years prior, instead of taking a 3 player shot in the mid rounds of supremely raw talent we should have brought in someone that needed less D%D to pair with Adams.

why people here look at a guy like MVS as a #2 here baffles me, he wont be looked as that by Minny or any where else, he finally started to develop some chemistry with Rodgers and was paid like a more polished receiver, what they got was a fast guy that catches 50% of targeted throws, we wouldn't have given him 10 mil even if we had it.

the Cupboard was near empty in 018, it's worse today, we signed a talented player in Watkins, but he hasn't played a full season but once and far less the last couple seasons, who can we count on? Lazard? he wouldn't be a #2 on half the teams in the league either, we need a influx of talent that don't require 3 years of coaching up.

we always have positional needs, but there isn't a position on this team as weak as WR, not even close, could we use a safety, you betcha, could we use a DT, of course, LT, Lber, edge, my point is there are always positions we would like to improve with a high draft pick, but imo each year there are positional priority's, and as best as possible those positions have to be fixed, or you become dis functional.

easy to say run the ball and play stout defense, but that is far harder to do then I think people think, I always go back to that guy McCarthy, his point that the less plays it takes to score, the less chance for a mis cue makes sense, times do change, we run more now then we have in years, but balance to me makes us less predictable.

rambling......

yeah and i don't understand your rant. Like at all.

We wouldn't be able to afford a competent 2018 draft pick on his 2nd contract based on how we are building our team. My whole point is we couldn't afford $10MM. What makes us think we could afford someone better at $12MM?

We certainly could strike a deal to push money way out, but our WR issue is more of a roster makeup issue (by allocating resources on the defense and run game) than it is on not drafting a WR after 2016 issue.

And I am okay with it. I love having a top end defense and top end running game on paper and then relying on our MVP QB to make our 20th to 25th pass catchers a top 15 to top 10 passing unit.

This is the closest to the "Patriots way" and even early "Russel Wilson Seahawks way" we have ever been. It is why I am just no wringing my hands too hard. Because this type of team has won it many times before. The biggest thing is our defense needs to be as good in real life as it is on paper.

it's not the Patriot way, Belichick always had at least two quality TE's or receivers, our problem as I've mentioned a 1000 times is lack of a secondary receiver that makes a defense pay attention, for years now that has been a issue, why in the hell did we just give Rodgers 50 mil if we don't plan to give him a receiver better then a delapidated Sammy Watkins?

there is no way we can stock this defense deep enough that we wont have injury's that weaken a position to the point that offenses attack it, same with our Running, better to have a potent areal attack to counter the issues I just mentioned

and you don't get it, we weren't going to resign scantling for even less then the 10 mil. Minny way over paid,
and we did all we could to get Adams to take 28 mil. of course we could have paid a lesser guy more then 12 mil.

lastly we need to do more then just bring in the best receiver we can get, we need another from this class, maybe two more, while there are only 4 or 5 first round talent there are a bunch more that are good just not as ready, taken one or two of them will fix the position for years to come, maybe

[YoHoChecko]

Did y'all know that Davante Adams has only played a full season twice in his career?

[Drj820]

Packers should trade a 2 for Terry Mclaurin

[salmar80]

Packers should trade a 2 for Terry Mclaurin

Absolutely. But the Commanders shouldn't trade their 1000+ yard WR1 for a 2nd rounder. Would be a terrible trade for them, even if McLaurin is asking for a new contract.

In other news, Deebo wants out of SF if he doesn't get a new contract...

[Yoop]

Did y'all know that Davante Adams has only played a full season twice in his career?

I count 3 times, did it as a rookie, still his worst was 12 games, Adams has basically been pretty healthy according to this, what pops out at me is the targeted throws, even in seasons that he's missed games the target numbers are very high, that in itself shows the decline from Adams to the next receiver.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... amDa01.htm

initially I was excited we signed Watkins, then I looked at production, hell on wheels as a rookie, but basically a decline ever since, not so much because of time missed, but just look at the decline of targeted throws, and who gets rid of a guy for missing 8 games his 3rd season, Buffalo dropped Watkins like he was a hot potato, had to be something besides his play ability, specially after spending such a high pick to get him, then only 1 yr with LAR, 14 games only 70 targeted throws, Kansas best season 14 games, 90 targets, 52 catches, less then 60% catch rate less then 700 yrds.
when I look at his production, the time he's missed isn't the worst thing, it's the lack of production when he did play, he seems like a part time player to me, and a guy satisfied just getting a check, probably the reason we can cut him for about 300k dead money.

thats why I'am not satisfied counting on Sammy, and still want maybe another vet, or the best this class has to offer.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... tkSa00.htm

more so now I look at Watson the way we all looked at Cobb signing last year, a pacifier to keep Rodgers off Gute's back, I mean we must look at Cobb as a person we'd like to up grade, 28 catches in 12 games 378 yrds, as Guty even said, he's not the player I'd have brought in. it just seems like Rodgers call again concerning Watkins.

[Pugger]

We stocked the cupboard in 2018. Though the talent wasn't amazing, we even found a mediocre #2 in MVS was too expensive for us this year.

this is the problem, and it actually started two years prior, instead of taking a 3 player shot in the mid rounds of supremely raw talent we should have brought in someone that needed less D%D to pair with Adams.

why people here look at a guy like MVS as a #2 here baffles me, he wont be looked as that by Minny or any where else, he finally started to develop some chemistry with Rodgers and was paid like a more polished receiver, what they got was a fast guy that catches 50% of targeted throws, we wouldn't have given him 10 mil even if we had it.

the Cupboard was near empty in 018, it's worse today, we signed a talented player in Watkins, but he hasn't played a full season but once and far less the last couple seasons, who can we count on? Lazard? he wouldn't be a #2 on half the teams in the league either, we need a influx of talent that don't require 3 years of coaching up.

we always have positional needs, but there isn't a position on this team as weak as WR, not even close, could we use a safety, you betcha, could we use a DT, of course, LT, Lber, edge, my point is there are always positions we would like to improve with a high draft pick, but imo each year there are positional priority's, and as best as possible those positions have to be fixed, or you become dis functional.

easy to say run the ball and play stout defense, but that is far harder to do then I think people think, I always go back to that guy McCarthy, his point that the less plays it takes to score, the less chance for a mis cue makes sense, times do change, we run more now then we have in years, but balance to me makes us less predictable.

rambling......

MVS is not in MN.

[Pugger]

I would say one difference is people who think drafting a cluster of WRs in the 5th round and beyond is "stocking the cupboard" and those who think that is throwing paint on the wall and hoping/praying some of it sticks.

I'm in the camp where I want Gute to take a WR or 2 before the 4th round. It doesn't necessarily have to be in the first but if one of the top guys is in reach in the first I say go for it. Most WRs taken after the 3rd round are just guys. Yes, you can find gems in later rounds but that is the exception rather than the rule.

[Yoop]

We stocked the cupboard in 2018. Though the talent wasn't amazing, we even found a mediocre #2 in MVS was too expensive for us this year.

this is the problem, and it actually started two years prior, instead of taking a 3 player shot in the mid rounds of supremely raw talent we should have brought in someone that needed less D%D to pair with Adams.

why people here look at a guy like MVS as a #2 here baffles me, he wont be looked as that by Minny or any where else, he finally started to develop some chemistry with Rodgers and was paid like a more polished receiver, what they got was a fast guy that catches 50% of targeted throws, we wouldn't have given him 10 mil even if we had it.

the Cupboard was near empty in 018, it's worse today, we signed a talented player in Watkins, but he hasn't played a full season but once and far less the last couple seasons, who can we count on? Lazard? he wouldn't be a #2 on half the teams in the league either, we need a influx of talent that don't require 3 years of coaching up.

we always have positional needs, but there isn't a position on this team as weak as WR, not even close, could we use a safety, you betcha, could we use a DT, of course, LT, Lber, edge, my point is there are always positions we would like to improve with a high draft pick, but imo each year there are positional priority's, and as best as possible those positions have to be fixed, or you become dis functional.

easy to say run the ball and play stout defense, but that is far harder to do then I think people think, I always go back to that guy McCarthy, his point that the less plays it takes to score, the less chance for a mis cue makes sense, times do change, we run more now then we have in years, but balance to me makes us less predictable.

rambling......

MVS is not in MN.

whoops, thanks for the correction, still I doubt he's a #2 with the Chiefs either, he'll stretch the defense just as he did for us and open up the under neath for Kelce and now Shuster, we'll have to replace him with another speed guy.

[YoHoChecko]

Did y'all know that Davante Adams has only played a full season twice in his career?

I count 3 times, did it as a rookie, still his worst was 12 games, Adams has basically been pretty healthy according to this, what pops out at me is the targeted throws, even in seasons that he's missed games the target numbers are very high, that in itself shows the decline from Adams to the next receiver.

I think you're forgetting that playing 16 games in 2021 was not a full season, as it's now a 17-game season.

Just wanted to point out how silly that stat is to use, exactly because it doesn't tell you if a player missed 1 game or 4 games or 8 games in a year.

If you say Watkins has missed 10 games in the past two seasons; or 16 games in the past four seasons, then you're telling us something.

Watkins has missed nearly a full quarter (24.6%) of his team's games over the past four years. While Adams has only missed 7 games in the past 3 years (or 17.9%)

[Yoop]

Did y'all know that Davante Adams has only played a full season twice in his career?

I count 3 times, did it as a rookie, still his worst was 12 games, Adams has basically been pretty healthy according to this, what pops out at me is the targeted throws, even in seasons that he's missed games the target numbers are very high, that in itself shows the decline from Adams to the next receiver.

I think you're forgetting that playing 16 games in 2021 was not a full season, as it's now a 17-game season.

Just wanted to point out how silly that stat is to use, exactly because it doesn't tell you if a player missed 1 game or 4 games or 8 games in a year.

If you say Watkins has missed 10 games in the past two seasons; or 16 games in the past four seasons, then you're telling us something.

Watkins has missed nearly a full quarter (24.6%) of his team's games over the past four years. While Adams has only missed 7 games in the past 3 years (or 17.9%)

I did in fact forget about last years change to 17 games, but again it comes back to how was the player used, and how often the QB threw him the ball, Tae has been the main target here for 6 or 7 years, after his first couple seasons at Buffalo Sammy looks like a after thought or second fiddle guy every where he's been, low target numbers.

thats my issue with Watkins.

I'am starting to think that since it will be difficult to get one of the best most ready to play receivers in this class we might be best off to trade a pick for another vet, then draft one or two in the 2nd or later rounds.

[Acrobat]

Deebo just asked to be traded. We have draft picks.

[lake shark]

He’s gonna want 30 mil per.