OTA's 2022

[Drj820]

the pick turned out great, but dumping 100m into a position and then using the highest draft pick in years for the same position is sure to turn some heads.

Luckily it turned out pretty well tho

[Yoop]

I will also add that by Year 2, Gary was showing enough that he should have been on the field more, but our coaches just were not using him like they should have been. His pressure rate was high, even as a rookie.

We essentially did to him then what we are doing to AJ Dillon now. That's on the coaches, not the GM or the pick.

The way we saw them use all three of Gary and the Smiths in that 49ers game was hawt secks. It's a shame they waited 'til Z's last game as a Packer to finally start doing that, though. EDGE/DL is not like QB or OL, you can play more than just the "starters" all at once.

Many also forget the status of the team and the Smiths at that time. We had no proven EDGE players at the time we signed Preston and Zadarius. Preston Smith was coming off a mediocre season with the Redskins. He had 2 decent seasons out of 4, but wasn't a sure fire "star." Zadarius was even less of a sure thing than Preston. He was coming off a good season, but in his 4 years in Baltimore he was a situational pass rusher and at most a part time starter. They became very good signings for the Packers, but they were in no way sure fire quality starters when we signed them. Drafting Gary was not the nonsensical pick it is being made out to be. Gary took a while to play up to potential and we knew he was raw at draft time. Then it happened that both Smiths played really well in 2019. That was a good problem to have.

again, why pay what we did then for basically mediocre talent, no, both Gute and Mike Smith new what they where buying, two players on the cusp, I sincerely believe if we took Mike Smith out of the picture it's very possible that Gute takes Simmons

Water under the bridge now, I'am Happy with Gary's evolution, but for 2 years I had to listen to every defense imaginable for taking him, and none made a lic of sense.

just saw that Simmons might be holding out of mandi Minny's cause he wants to renogociate his rookie deal, thats how good he's been for his first 3 seasons.

[go pak go]

The difference between a position, especially one like Edge that requires three strong players, being incredibly deep to the cupboards are bare is a very fine edge. Often it comes down to one player.

Nitpicking that Edge was too deep with player resources is pretty absurd. Especially when one of the resources was a developing rookie/player.

If I'm called being a nitckpicker for pointing out that Aaron Rodgers missed this:

image.png (360.21 KiB) Viewed 487 times

Then I am happy to call out the reverse when complaining over a top 15 selection of a budding star at football's 2nd highest premium position. I can count on my hand the amount of 1st round players who were better or equal picks to Gary in the last 22 years.

1. Aaron Rodgers
2. Clay Matthews
3. Jaw Alexander
4. Kenny Clark
5. Rashan Gary

I honestly can't think of any other 1st round picks who are in the top 5 of best 1st round draft choices by GB. Eric Stokes could be trending that way.

Just a weird hill to die on.

[go pak go]

Water under the bridge now, I'am Happy with Gary's evolution, but for 2 years I had to listen to every defense imaginable for taking him, and none made a lic of sense.

I can only really remember one defense:

1. It's early. Time will tell if it was a good pick or not.


That's about all I remember.

[Pckfn23]

Also, I want to confront this continued use of PFTs rank 58 of Gary as gospel for his draftnik rank that year.

image.png (161.67 KiB) Viewed 482 times

https://www.nflmockdraftdatabase.com/pl ... ashan-gary

Also, PFTs last mock draft had Rashan Gary going 19th to the Titans: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... ock-draft/

It's not accurate to continue to claim PFT had Gary ranked 58th or that even if that was true trying to pass that rank off as the true measure of Rashan Gary in the media that year. The FACTs are that Gary was a unanimous first round pick. Before April he was a consensus top 10 pick and at draft time his consensus rank was 16. That said the consensus rank by dratniks means very little. We picked him 12th and in his 4th season was was getting Pro Bowl/All Pro consideration. That's a pretty successful draft pick regardless of how it is sliced.

Have whatever opinion of Rashan Gary that you like, but use actual facts to support that opinion, not fabricated ones.

[Yoop]

the pick turned out great, but dumping 100m into a position and then using the highest draft pick in years for the same position is sure to turn some heads.

Luckily it turned out pretty well tho

NO KIDDING, but not from several here.

actually I think this is a ME thing, there are some here that would never agree with me, I could say it's 80 degree at west side high, and one would shout no freaking way, it's only 79

I figured at some point it would be fine, I never doubted the ability to see talent from Mike Smith or his ability to coach it up, and Gutekunst has been scouting for 20 years, but like you and most other fans we expect slot 12 to start at some point year 1 and produce, I didn't like the pick, never said I didn't like the player.

[Pckfn23]

I will also add that by Year 2, Gary was showing enough that he should have been on the field more, but our coaches just were not using him like they should have been. His pressure rate was high, even as a rookie.

We essentially did to him then what we are doing to AJ Dillon now. That's on the coaches, not the GM or the pick.

The way we saw them use all three of Gary and the Smiths in that 49ers game was hawt secks. It's a shame they waited 'til Z's last game as a Packer to finally start doing that, though. EDGE/DL is not like QB or OL, you can play more than just the "starters" all at once.

Many also forget the status of the team and the Smiths at that time. We had no proven EDGE players at the time we signed Preston and Zadarius. Preston Smith was coming off a mediocre season with the Redskins. He had 2 decent seasons out of 4, but wasn't a sure fire "star." Zadarius was even less of a sure thing than Preston. He was coming off a good season, but in his 4 years in Baltimore he was a situational pass rusher and at most a part time starter. They became very good signings for the Packers, but they were in no way sure fire quality starters when we signed them. Drafting Gary was not the nonsensical pick it is being made out to be. Gary took a while to play up to potential and we knew he was raw at draft time. Then it happened that both Smiths played really well in 2019. That was a good problem to have.

again, why pay what we did then for basically mediocre talent, no, both Gute and Mike Smith new what they where buying, two players on the cusp, I sincerely believe if we took Mike Smith out of the picture it's very possible that Gute takes Simmons

Water under the bridge now, I'am Happy with Gary's evolution, but for 2 years I had to listen to every defense imaginable for taking him, and none made a lic of sense.

just saw that Simmons might be holding out of mandi Minny's cause he wants to renogociate his rookie deal, thats how good he's been for his first 3 seasons.

It wasn't pay for mediocre talent, it was pay for mediocre production and high potential talent. The front office saw that and was right. They could have been wrong too, it happens. They hedged their bets and went with another edge rusher because of the lack of talent at the position and the possibility of one of the Smiths not living up to potential.

I am not sure where the new Mike Smith argument is coming in. One can believe if it wasn't for him we go Simmons, but it doesn't make it anything but an unverifiable belief with no evidence what so ever.

The defense of Gary should make sense because he has turned into the player that many saw and "defended."

[Drj820]

Many also forget the status of the team and the Smiths at that time. We had no proven EDGE players at the time we signed Preston and Zadarius. Preston Smith was coming off a mediocre season with the Redskins. He had 2 decent seasons out of 4, but wasn't a sure fire "star." Zadarius was even less of a sure thing than Preston. He was coming off a good season, but in his 4 years in Baltimore he was a situational pass rusher and at most a part time starter. They became very good signings for the Packers, but they were in no way sure fire quality starters when we signed them. Drafting Gary was not the nonsensical pick it is being made out to be. Gary took a while to play up to potential and we knew he was raw at draft time. Then it happened that both Smiths played really well in 2019. That was a good problem to have.

again, why pay what we did then for basically mediocre talent, no, both Gute and Mike Smith new what they where buying, two players on the cusp, I sincerely believe if we took Mike Smith out of the picture it's very possible that Gute takes Simmons

Water under the bridge now, I'am Happy with Gary's evolution, but for 2 years I had to listen to every defense imaginable for taking him, and none made a lic of sense.

just saw that Simmons might be holding out of mandi Minny's cause he wants to renogociate his rookie deal, thats how good he's been for his first 3 seasons.

It wasn't pay for mediocre talent, it was pay for mediocre production and high potential talent. The front office saw that and was right. They could have been wrong too, it happens. They hedged their bets and went with another edge rusher because of the lack of talent at the position and the possibility of one of the Smiths not living up to potential.

I am not sure where the new Mike Smith argument is coming in. One can believe if it wasn't for him we go Simmons, but it doesn't make it anything but an unverifiable belief with no evidence what so ever.

The defense of Gary should make sense because he has turned into the player that many saw and "defended."

Gary was the definition of high potential talent, and low production. They werent hedging their bet on anything. The plan was let Gary develop behind two studs and then let one of the studs go and Gary be ready to replace. The plan they desired worked to perfection. But you dont pay 100m out and then bring in a guy who never produced much in college to "hedge a bet". The FO paid what they paid to the Smiths because they believed in them. You may not have, they did.

[Pckfn23]

again, why pay what we did then for basically mediocre talent, no, both Gute and Mike Smith new what they where buying, two players on the cusp, I sincerely believe if we took Mike Smith out of the picture it's very possible that Gute takes Simmons

Water under the bridge now, I'am Happy with Gary's evolution, but for 2 years I had to listen to every defense imaginable for taking him, and none made a lic of sense.

just saw that Simmons might be holding out of mandi Minny's cause he wants to renogociate his rookie deal, thats how good he's been for his first 3 seasons.

It wasn't pay for mediocre talent, it was pay for mediocre production and high potential talent. The front office saw that and was right. They could have been wrong too, it happens. They hedged their bets and went with another edge rusher because of the lack of talent at the position and the possibility of one of the Smiths not living up to potential.

I am not sure where the new Mike Smith argument is coming in. One can believe if it wasn't for him we go Simmons, but it doesn't make it anything but an unverifiable belief with no evidence what so ever.

The defense of Gary should make sense because he has turned into the player that many saw and "defended."

Gary was the definition of high potential talent, and low production. They werent hedging their bet on anything. The plan was let Gary develop behind two studs and then let one of the studs go and Gary be ready to replace. The plan they desired worked to perfection. But you dont pay 100m out and then bring in a guy who never produced much in college to "hedge a bet". The FO paid what they paid to the Smiths because they believed in them. You may not have, they did.

That's simply not accurate. Preston Smith and Zadarius Smith were not what one would call studs when we picked them up as free agents. Gary was picked to ensure that if one or both did not pan out, he could step up, as well as provide provide good depth at the position. As I stated before people forget who and what Preston and Zadarius Smith were when we signed them.

It is interesting to claim Rashan Gary didn't produce much in college, but then claim both Preston and Zadarius Smith were studs when we signed them. On a per game basis, the production of both Smiths was similar to Gary's. To say that Gary didn't produce much in college is not accurate. To say the Smiths were both studs when we signed them is not accurate. There was a LOT of potential across the board there and it all worked out! Luckily we didn't even have to rush Gary along as the Smiths were both so good in 2019.

FYI, I didn't say I didn't believe in the Smiths. I also very much said the FO did as well. There is just a huge misconception about what we were getting when we signed them.

[Yoop]

The difference between a position, especially one like Edge that requires three strong players, being incredibly deep to the cupboards are bare is a very fine edge. Often it comes down to one player.

Nitpicking that Edge was too deep with player resources is pretty absurd. Especially when one of the resources was a developing rookie/player.

If I'm called being a nitckpicker for pointing out that Aaron Rodgers missed this:

image.png

Then I am happy to call out the reverse when complaining over a top 15 selection of a budding star at football's 2nd highest premium position. I can count on my hand the amount of 1st round players who were better or equal picks to Gary in the last 22 years.

1. Aaron Rodgers
2. Clay Matthews
3. Jaw Alexander
4. Kenny Clark
5. Rashan Gary

I honestly can't think of any other 1st round picks who are in the top 5 of best 1st round draft choices by GB. Eric Stokes could be trending that way.

Just a weird hill to die on.

both Lazard ( broken coverage) and Adams where headed to open spaces, the safety blew his coverage of Lazard to double Adams, at the time Rodgers let go of the ball both players where open, again this comes down to what Rodgers see's from his position versus a over the top angle which could show anything you want it to be, you could show open receivers on just about any play, and blame thew QB for not throwing to him, sure some are obvious, but thats not the case here.

I wont debate you on the draft picks except to say you are wayyyyyy over rating Gary, Simmons is ranked #33 on prisco's top 100, Gary is #64, Campbell is #63, OL Micah Hyde is #52

PFR, which I'd rather use PFF, but wont pay gives Gary 47 pressures and 11 sacks, there are a t least a half doz edge rushers with higher grades, where hoping Gary becomes a Mathews, but he aint quite there yet.

[Drj820]

It wasn't pay for mediocre talent, it was pay for mediocre production and high potential talent. The front office saw that and was right. They could have been wrong too, it happens. They hedged their bets and went with another edge rusher because of the lack of talent at the position and the possibility of one of the Smiths not living up to potential.

I am not sure where the new Mike Smith argument is coming in. One can believe if it wasn't for him we go Simmons, but it doesn't make it anything but an unverifiable belief with no evidence what so ever.

The defense of Gary should make sense because he has turned into the player that many saw and "defended."

Gary was the definition of high potential talent, and low production. They werent hedging their bet on anything. The plan was let Gary develop behind two studs and then let one of the studs go and Gary be ready to replace. The plan they desired worked to perfection. But you dont pay 100m out and then bring in a guy who never produced much in college to "hedge a bet". The FO paid what they paid to the Smiths because they believed in them. You may not have, they did.

That's simply not accurate. Preston Smith and Zadarius Smith were not what one would call studs when we pick them up as free agents. Gary was pick to ensure that if one or both did not pan out, he could step up, as well as provide provide good depth at the position. As I stated before people forget who and what Preston and Zadarius Smith were when we signed them.

It is interesting to claim Rashan Gary didn't produce much in college, but then claim both Preston and Zadarius SMith were studs when we signed them. On a per game basis, the production of both Smiths was similar to Gary's. To say that Gary didn't produce much in college is not accurate.

FYI, I didn't say I didn't believe in the Smiths. I also very much said the FO did as well. There is just a huge misconception about what we were getting when we signed them.

the contracts given to these players demonstrates the FO identified them, paid them, and believed in them.

Gary was depth sure, but he was never expected to step in year one in case one of the Smiths were a bust.

The team believed in them, and offered them contracts that reflect that.

Gary was a pick for depth and the future. He was in no way i signal of disbelief in the Smiths.

[Pckfn23]

Here are the top 5 edge rushers by pressures in 2021 (PFR):

image.png (124.21 KiB) Viewed 463 times

Those are also the top 5 pass rushers in the NFL. I don't think anyone is overrating Gary let alone "wayyyyyy" overrating him.

[Pckfn23]

the contracts given to these players demonstrates the FO identified them, paid them, and believed in them.

100% Belief is not production though... Their production was not "studly"

Gary was depth sure, but he was never expected to step in year one in case one of the Smiths were a bust.

The team believed in them, and offered them contracts that reflect that.

One can "believe" that if they want to, but we will never know as both Smiths lived up to their contracts in year 1 and played VERY well.

Gary was a pick for depth and the future. He was in no way i signal of disbelief in the Smiths.

Signal of disbelief? How about prudent roster building? We signed 2 mediocre production players with high potential and to ensure we had the talent at edge rusher we also drafted an edge rusher at 12. This was both for 2019, but also beyond. Roster building is not a short term endeavor. With the Edge position being all but bare going into the 2019 offseason it was prudent to get all 3 for both that year and beyond. While it may be questionable to some, it doesn't make it a bad or ridiculous move.

[BF004]

How is there only 47 pressures with Gary, I thought he was over 80.

[Yoop]

It wasn't pay for mediocre talent, it was pay for mediocre production and high potential talent. The front office saw that and was right. They could have been wrong too, it happens. They hedged their bets and went with another edge rusher because of the lack of talent at the position and the possibility of one of the Smiths not living up to potential.

I am not sure where the new Mike Smith argument is coming in. One can believe if it wasn't for him we go Simmons, but it doesn't make it anything but an unverifiable belief with no evidence what so ever.

The defense of Gary should make sense because he has turned into the player that many saw and "defended."

Gary was the definition of high potential talent, and low production. They werent hedging their bet on anything. The plan was let Gary develop behind two studs and then let one of the studs go and Gary be ready to replace. The plan they desired worked to perfection. But you dont pay 100m out and then bring in a guy who never produced much in college to "hedge a bet". The FO paid what they paid to the Smiths because they believed in them. You may not have, they did.

That's simply not accurate. Preston Smith and Zadarius Smith were not what one would call studs when we picked them up as free agents. Gary was picked to ensure that if one or both did not pan out, he could step up, as well as provide provide good depth at the position. As I stated before people forget who and what Preston and Zadarius Smith were when we signed them.

It is interesting to claim Rashan Gary didn't produce much in college, but then claim both Preston and Zadarius Smith were studs when we signed them. On a per game basis, the production of both Smiths was similar to Gary's. To say that Gary didn't produce much in college is not accurate. To say the Smiths were both studs when we signed them is not accurate. There was a LOT of potential across the board there and it all worked out! Luckily we didn't even have to rush Gary along as the Smiths were both so good in 2019.

FYI, I didn't say I didn't believe in the Smiths. I also very much said the FO did as well. There is just a huge misconception about what we were getting when we signed them.

china 263 miles, straight south to get there you'll need a bigger shovel though

seriously, in one thread you say we paid 100 mil. for potential, and the next we paid a 100 mil for players that needed a 12 sloter for insurance, I don't care how you want to defend this pick, your in a small minority till he poped last year, most fans don't see it like you do, and you got nothing on them when it comes to football IQ.

We needed a Wyatt ( Simmons) 3 years ago more then we needed a Gary, edge isn't the only way to get to the QB and we've been terrible against the run for longer then that as well, there is no defendable excuse for picking Gary

[Drj820]

the contracts given to these players demonstrates the FO identified them, paid them, and believed in them.

100% Belief is not production though... Their production was not "studly"

Gary was depth sure, but he was never expected to step in year one in case one of the Smiths were a bust.

The team believed in them, and offered them contracts that reflect that.

One can "believe" that if they want to, but we will never know as both Smiths lived up to their contracts in year 1 and played VERY well.

Gary was a pick for depth and the future. He was in no way i signal of disbelief in the Smiths.

Signal of disbelief? How about prudent roster building? We signed 2 mediocre production players with high potential and to ensure we had the talent at edge rusher we also drafted an edge rusher at 12. This was both for 2019, but also beyond. Roster building is not a short term endeavor. With the Edge position being all but bare going into the 2019 offseason it was prudent to get all 3 for both that year and beyond. While it may be questionable to some, it doesn't make it a bad or ridiculous move.

I am saying they had a plan...and it worked great. You dont have to feel the need to defend the FO in this debate. I think they did well! We are just debating the plan. You are saying they lacked over the top production in Washington and Baltimore...I am agreeing with that. And that made the FO need to spend a 12 in case one of them busted out. Thats where i disagree. They had confidence in the Smiths, thats why they shelled out 100m.

I am saying the contracts the Smiths received were not contracts that implied the Packers would need to "hedge their bets" (your words). I am not claiming the Smiths had production that warranted their contracts, I am saying the Packers were VERY confident they would work in their system and be what they needed...so they paid them to fill those spots. They were right! Good job Gutey!

Next, the Gary pick was then for much needed depth, and for someone who could contribute a few years down the road. I know this because he wasnt expected to play immediately, as we knew he was raw talent that needed to hone his craft, and it was a pick for the future.

It was not that the org was unsure of how the Smiths would play so they picked the same position at 12 overall. You do not give the contracts the FO gave to those players unless they were really sure. If they gave that kind of money just to take a flyer on a couple scrubs, they should be fired. Luckily, thats now what happened.

[Yoop]

How is there only 47 pressures with Gary, I thought he was over 80.

thats PFF, and you know what we think of that back room outfit

I had thought it was mid 70's, and Perry had 47, and Clark had 46, but I think those where all pff's grades, also that as a team we topped 200, but unless someone has paid to get PFF then I don't know where to look any more

[Labrev]

The draft is not like FA. You don't have about equal chance at everyone, you only have a shot at what's left on the board.

By the time we were on the clock, Gary was far and away one of the best prospects remaining, and definitely one of the highest upside to be elite. Simmons was basically the only guy who had an argument. The fact that another pick that probably would have been good for the team also existed does not detract from a pick you did make that turned out very well.

And once again, Simmons had the incident where he punched a woman on video. In drafting Wyatt, our org made it clear they did not think the allegations were a big deal because the details (i.e. kicking down a door) were not an issue. It's obvious then what WOULD have been an issue -- actually battering someone. Well, that's what Simmons did, on video. That might be acceptable to yoop, who has blamed the victim, but it's clearly not acceptable to this org. Deal with it.

[Pckfn23]

How is there only 47 pressures with Gary, I thought he was over 80.

PFF and PFR difference.

[Pckfn23]

the contracts given to these players demonstrates the FO identified them, paid them, and believed in them.

100% Belief is not production though... Their production was not "studly"

Gary was depth sure, but he was never expected to step in year one in case one of the Smiths were a bust.

The team believed in them, and offered them contracts that reflect that.

One can "believe" that if they want to, but we will never know as both Smiths lived up to their contracts in year 1 and played VERY well.

Gary was a pick for depth and the future. He was in no way i signal of disbelief in the Smiths.

Signal of disbelief? How about prudent roster building? We signed 2 mediocre production players with high potential and to ensure we had the talent at edge rusher we also drafted an edge rusher at 12. This was both for 2019, but also beyond. Roster building is not a short term endeavor. With the Edge position being all but bare going into the 2019 offseason it was prudent to get all 3 for both that year and beyond. While it may be questionable to some, it doesn't make it a bad or ridiculous move.

I am saying they had a plan...and it worked great. You dont have to feel the need to defend the FO in this debate. I think they did well! We are just debating the plan. You are saying they lacked over the top production in Washington and Baltimore...I am agreeing with that. And that made the FO need to spend a 12 in case one of them busted out. Thats where i disagree. They had confidence in the Smiths, thats why they shelled out 100m.

I am saying the contracts the Smiths received were not contracts that implied the Packers would need to "hedge their bets" (your words). I am not claiming the Smiths had production that warranted their contracts, I am saying the Packers were VERY confident they would work in their system and be what they needed...so they paid them to fill those spots. They were right! Good job Gutey!

Next, the Gary pick was then for much needed depth, and for someone who could contribute a few years down the road. I know this because he wasnt expected to play immediately, as we knew he was raw talent that needed to hone his craft, and it was a pick for the future.

It was not that the org was unsure of how the Smiths would play so they picked the same position at 12 overall. You do not give the contracts the FO gave to those players unless they were really sure. If they gave that kind of money just to take a flyer on a couple scrubs, they should be fired. Luckily, thats now what happened.

No blind defending going on, simply looking at the situation as it was in 2019 and the reasons behind the moves.

They paid 100m for potential, but that potential was not a sure thing, just as they spend the 12th pick on Gary for potential and again, not a sure thing. They were looking for 3 studs and got it!

The contracts were shelled out because the cupboard was bare at Edge and we were not in the running for a top tier Edge that year. Gary was picked to hedge the bet of either one of the Smiths not panning out, in part. All 3 did pan out and it work out beautifully!

Absolutely was the Gary pick also a pick for depth as well as a starter, whether year 1 or in the future. Thankfully we didn't even have to see if he could start year 1.

Again, don't forget potential, that's what they paid for in the Smiths potential. Potential always has a chance not to pan out. There are no sure things and it gets FOs fired if they believe there are and build a roster that way.