Packers Huddle

Pugger wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 15:47

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 10:39

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 10:20

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.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 10:33

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.

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Apr 2022 15:52

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.

Yoop wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 17:05

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Apr 2022 15:52

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......

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 16:29

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 16:09

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.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 17:22

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.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 09:59

salmar80 wrote: ↑

18 Apr 2022 16:17

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.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 16:29

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 16:09

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.

go pak go wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 17:20

Yoop wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 17:05

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Apr 2022 15:52

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 wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 22:36

Packers should trade a 2 for Terry Mclaurin

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 21:22

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

Yoop wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 17:05

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Apr 2022 15:52

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......

Drj820 wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 17:22

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.

Pugger wrote: ↑

20 Apr 2022 07:05

Yoop wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 17:05

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Apr 2022 15:52

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.

Yoop wrote: ↑

20 Apr 2022 05:41

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 21:22

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.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

20 Apr 2022 09:56

Yoop wrote: ↑

20 Apr 2022 05:41

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

19 Apr 2022 21:22

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%)