Packers Huddle

Situation has something to do with rookies being impactful sure, but the talent/motivation of the player has more. This is especially true in taking about impactful rookie seasons. Situation is not the main reason Moss, Jefferson, and Chase are the only 3 rookie receivers to receive all pro honors in the last 3 decades. Situation is irrelevant when saying that half the impactful rookie receivers over the last 20 years were drafted outside the first round.

Funny how these perfect fits always look great before the draft but often not nearly as clean a year or two later. Then the excuses come. This is what the draft is. Historical hit rates pretty much show a lot of GMs are going to be dead wrong Thursday night. For those of us that are honest, a lot of is are going to be dead wrong too on a lot of guys.

obviously perfect fit is a broad term, as like with us Rodgers with Lafluers schemes could make a quite a few of these receivers a perfect fit, as this guy says about Burks, could be a slot monster in our schemes, or London, we all know Rodgers could get the best that kid has to offer, or Watson, Pierce, Pickens.

for me it's hard to say any one of em will actually fail for us, I think just about all could do well here, I can't say who I think is the best, what I do know is that we need a couple, we have to, even with Watkins our WR position ranks near dead last in the league, and this seems to be a deep class, take one early and take at least another a little later.

So where do you think we need to trade up to be fairly certain we can get out guy.


Like do we have to trade to 6 or 8 if we want to be really sure we get Jameson? 11?

How about drake, olave, Wilson and Burks.

Obviously can never be 100% unless you trade to 1. But just say we know we want Olave, where should we trade to realistically make sure that happens?



For pick 22, I’ve kind of gotten down to trading up for a WR, maybe stand pat for Olave or Burks, or trade back.

All the other positions there. No one i really love that I wouldn’t care missing that we couldn’t get at 28 or similar value.

NCF wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 06:55

Funny how these perfect fits always look great before the draft but often not nearly as clean a year or two later. Then the excuses come. This is what the draft is. Historical hit rates pretty much show a lot of GMs are going to be dead wrong Thursday night. For those of us that are honest, a lot of is are going to be dead wrong too on a lot of guys.

Not if I selectively revise what I said.

NCF wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 06:55

Funny how these perfect fits always look great before the draft but often not nearly as clean a year or two later. Then the excuses come. This is what the draft is. Historical hit rates pretty much show a lot of GMs are going to be dead wrong Thursday night. For those of us that are honest, a lot of is are going to be dead wrong too on a lot of guys.

Remember how adored the Amari Rodgers selection was from May until early August last year?

Then the excuse train in training camp and preseason.

Then the utter and disappointing realization during the season.

Then the hopeful, "he will turn it around in the offseason" this year.

Rookie wrs are now better than ever. College programs are better and less time is needed to adapt. WR contracts are large so better to have 5 year rookie contracts.

I would actually be surprised if receiver is not the most drafted position in the first two rounds in recent years. I expect it will be this year.

BF004 wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 07:26

So where do you think we need to trade up to be fairly certain we can get out guy.


Like do we have to trade to 6 or 8 if we want to be really sure we get Jameson? 11?

How about drake, olave, Wilson and Burks.

Obviously can never be 100% unless you trade to 1. But just say we know we want Olave, where should we trade to realistically make sure that happens?



For pick 22, I’ve kind of gotten down to trading up for a WR, maybe stand pat for Olave or Burks, or trade back.

All the other positions there. No one i really love that I wouldn’t care missing that we couldn’t get at 28 or similar value.

My fav is still Wilson and Williams, but I expect they'll go top 13, and cost a ton to move for, basically I like a half doz or more of the WR, Olave wins with route running, London with shear size, Burks with strength, Burks might be available at 22, the others I think we'll have to trade up for, Pickens as you said has warts, but could end up one of the best in class, same with Watson, or even Pierce, but need work, I like Skyy Moore and also Dotson simply because they are good route runners, Rodgers expects that from his receivers, that alone helps build timing and chemistry, which translates to early expectations that they will garner his attention sooner then later.

this has been a tough draft to rank players, the draft sites I use to use all have pay walls, so that limits my ability to get data.

bud fox wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 07:41

Rookie wrs are now better than ever. College programs are better and less time is needed to adapt. WR contracts are large so better to have 5 year rookie contracts.

I would actually be surprised if receiver is not the most drafted position in the first two rounds in recent years. I expect it will be this year.

It's a deep class, so your probably right, imo WR is the second most important position on the field after QB, it's not called the live ball era because of RB's or edge freaking rushers

go pak go wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 07:37

NCF wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 06:55

Funny how these perfect fits always look great before the draft but often not nearly as clean a year or two later. Then the excuses come. This is what the draft is. Historical hit rates pretty much show a lot of GMs are going to be dead wrong Thursday night. For those of us that are honest, a lot of is are going to be dead wrong too on a lot of guys.

Remember how adored the Amari Rodgers selection was from May until early August last year?

Then the excuse train in training camp and preseason.

Then the utter and disappointing realization during the season.

Then the hopeful, "he will turn it around in the offseason" this year.

why wouldn't he be adored? really he was the closest thing to a bonefide WR that we've drafted in 6 years, anything better then the 3 stooges act was bound to get some love

Yoop wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 08:02

go pak go wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 07:37

NCF wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 06:55

Funny how these perfect fits always look great before the draft but often not nearly as clean a year or two later. Then the excuses come. This is what the draft is. Historical hit rates pretty much show a lot of GMs are going to be dead wrong Thursday night. For those of us that are honest, a lot of is are going to be dead wrong too on a lot of guys.

Remember how adored the Amari Rodgers selection was from May until early August last year?

Then the excuse train in training camp and preseason.

Then the utter and disappointing realization during the season.

Then the hopeful, "he will turn it around in the offseason" this year.

why wouldn't he be adored? really he was the closest thing to a bonefide WR that we've drafted in 6 years, anything better then the 3 stooges act was bound to get some love

Yup.

So just some food for thought when saying this like this.

Yoop wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 07:13

for me it's hard to say any one of em will actually fail for us, I think just about all could do well here, I can't say who I think is the best, what I do know is that we need a couple, we have to, even with Watkins our WR position ranks near dead last in the league, and this seems to be a deep class, take one early and take at least another a little later.

Nothing wrong with fanning. But I absolutely think there is significant risk half of these WRs in Round 1 will fail.

Because they almost always do.

I like a lot of these WR's. They are all nice prospects. There is plenty of reason for optimism with any of them, really. History shows, though, that there is also plenty of reason for skepticism. I just think we need to temper our expectations. This conversation has devolved into whether a rookie WR will have a 1,000 yard season as a rookie or not even be worth a 1st-round pick. There is plenty of room for middle ground here.

ESPN actually wrote today that it might not be surprising if Green Bay does not pick a WR on Thursday.

Gosh…

I wonder if I could make a living writing stuff like that. Sigh.
:-)

go pak go wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 09:03

Yoop wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 08:02

go pak go wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 07:37

Remember how adored the Amari Rodgers selection was from May until early August last year?

Then the excuse train in training camp and preseason.

Then the utter and disappointing realization during the season.

Then the hopeful, "he will turn it around in the offseason" this year.

why wouldn't he be adored? really he was the closest thing to a bonefide WR that we've drafted in 6 years, anything better then the 3 stooges act was bound to get some love

Yup.

So just some food for thought when saying this like this.

Yoop wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 07:13

for me it's hard to say any one of em will actually fail for us, I think just about all could do well here, I can't say who I think is the best, what I do know is that we need a couple, we have to, even with Watkins our WR position ranks near dead last in the league, and this seems to be a deep class, take one early and take at least another a little later.

Nothing wrong with fanning. But I absolutely think there is significant risk half of these WRs in Round 1 will fail.

Because they almost always do.

your so stuck in the past when every coach acted like Mike McCarthy your blinded to whats been going on the last few years, since 2018 as the article 23 brought shows plenty of rookie WR have made significant contributions as rookies, and that wont be changing, your run first desire is short sighted, sure it's now playing a bigger part, but it will never ever again be more dominate then passing the ball, our team with Lafluer and Rodgers has to be every dream scenario for every receiver in this draft class, who wouldn't want to be a part of what we do.

this aint made up stuff

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/2022-nfl-d ... are-built-

Or do you follow the path of Kansas City, who traded Hill to the Dolphins for five draft picks, including a first- and second-rounder this year? Or Green Bay who sent Adams, who will hit 30 during the 2022 season, to Vegas for a first and a second?

The Chiefs and Packers are believed to be believers in this draft class in particular and the trend of instant impact wideouts in general.

NCF wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 09:22

I like a lot of these WR's. They are all nice prospects. There is plenty of reason for optimism with any of them, really. History shows, though, that there is also plenty of reason for skepticism. I just think we need to temper our expectations. This conversation has devolved into whether a rookie WR will have a 1,000 yard season as a rookie or not even be worth a 1st-round pick. There is plenty of room for middle ground here.

I simply used the letter K rather then typing 1000 yrds, it was easier, do I believe some in this class could produce that for us as a rookie, you bet I do, they would be on the perfect stage to do it, do I expect that, not exactly, but anything even close would be considered a success imo.

It's a fine WR class by itself, just not great for what we need: a boundary WR1 who can contribute a lot right away and/or replace MVS's speed.

Jameson: just about perfect, but we're not gonna sniff him, a playmaker like this is not going to fall just because of an ACL
London: doesn't check the speed box, otherwise fits the bill but may be difficult to acquire
Pickens: maturity/ethic question-marks
Olave: can't play him on run downs, probably not a true WR1
Wilson: can't play him on run downs, probably have to give up a lot to even get him, not sure if he is a true WR1
Burks: more of a big slot than boundary guy, has weight issues, has good on-field build up speed but not a burner ala MVS
Watson: going to make a big jump in competition level, so readiness is a question-mark
Dotson: basically slot-only, no room for that

Labrev wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 09:59

It's a fine WR class by itself, just not great for what we need: a boundary WR1 who can contribute a lot right away and/or replace MVS's speed.

Jameson: just about perfect, but we're not gonna sniff him, a playmaker like this is not going to fall just because of an ACL
London: doesn't check the speed box, otherwise fits the bill but may be difficult to acquire
Pickens: maturity/ethic question-marks
Olave: can't play him on run downs, probably not a true WR1
Wilson: can't play him on run downs, probably have to give up a lot to even get him, not sure if he is a true WR1
Burks: more of a big slot than boundary guy, has weight issues, has good on-field build up speed but not a burner ala MVS
Watson: going to make a big jump in competition level, so readiness is a question-mark
Dotson: basically slot-only, no room for that

I get the point, but heres mine, a bunch you mentioned are more versatile then you give them credit for, for instance Wilson can play any of the three positions, same with OLave, Williams, even Burks and London, we used Adams in the slot half the time, and as to blocking, I doubt anyone is born with the ability to do that, so basically that is something there taught to do, we got teachers again I doubt most receivers are asked to do that in college, obviously a guy like Olave most likely was never asked to, so it's something he'll have to learn.

to me the slot position now provides a lot more production, so relegating it to a #3 roll is confusing, probably why a lot of mocksters have us taking Burks.

Labrev wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 09:59

It's a fine WR class by itself, just not great for what we need: a boundary WR1 who can contribute a lot right away and/or replace MVS's speed.

Jameson: just about perfect, but we're not gonna sniff him, a playmaker like this is not going to fall just because of an ACL
London: doesn't check the speed box, otherwise fits the bill but may be difficult to acquire
Pickens: maturity/ethic question-marks
Olave: can't play him on run downs, probably not a true WR1
Wilson: can't play him on run downs, probably have to give up a lot to even get him, not sure if he is a true WR1
Burks: more of a big slot than boundary guy, has weight issues, has good on-field build up speed but not a burner ala MVS
Watson: going to make a big jump in competition level, so readiness is a question-mark
Dotson: basically slot-only, no room for that

Curious as to why Wilson and Olave can't play on run downs ? That seems absurd opinion for multiple reasons.

Realist wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 12:31

Labrev wrote: ↑

27 Apr 2022 09:59

It's a fine WR class by itself, just not great for what we need: a boundary WR1 who can contribute a lot right away and/or replace MVS's speed.

Jameson: just about perfect, but we're not gonna sniff him, a playmaker like this is not going to fall just because of an ACL
London: doesn't check the speed box, otherwise fits the bill but may be difficult to acquire
Pickens: maturity/ethic question-marks
Olave: can't play him on run downs, probably not a true WR1
Wilson: can't play him on run downs, probably have to give up a lot to even get him, not sure if he is a true WR1
Burks: more of a big slot than boundary guy, has weight issues, has good on-field build up speed but not a burner ala MVS
Watson: going to make a big jump in competition level, so readiness is a question-mark
Dotson: basically slot-only, no room for that

Curious as to why Wilson and Olave can't play on run downs ? That seems absurd opinion for multiple reasons.

They don't block well.

**edit** oh I mean, you can play them on run plays, it will just limit the effectiveness of it due to their limitations as blockers, and MLF's scheme requires that more than most others.

Maybe MLF can adjust his scheme to where talented pass catchers cam focus on being playmakers and stay on the field so they pose a threat on every play??

Starting to sound like McCarthy who hated Aaron jones and famously said being a running back was more than being able to run the ball.

An elite WR who can block is a bonus. Just give me someone who can get open and catch the ball for now. We don’t have any of those guys at the moment