Packers Huddle

Rank The Roster: 2020 Edition

1. Aaron Rodgers (48%)[--]
2. Za'Darius Smith (70%)[+5]
3. Aaron Jones (43%)[+3]
4. Davante Adams (45%)[--]
5. David Bakhtiari (59%)[-3]
6. Kenny Clark (100%)[-3]
7. Jaire Alexander (74%)[-2]
8. Preston Smith (58%)[+5]
9. Elgton Jenkins (75%)[+15]
10. Kevin King (47%)[+4]
11. Adrian Amos (78%)[-1]
12. Corey Linsley (63%)[-1]
13. Christian Kirksey (56%)[FA]
14. Darnell Savage (81%)[+2]
15. Rick Wagner (38%)[FA]
16. Jace Sternberger (44%)[+16]
17. Current

Percent of vote the winner got will be in parenthesis, position change vs. 2019 will be in brackets.

Here's how this works:

Each day there is a new thread/poll, starting at #1, on down to whereever we get. The whole point of this exercise is to have something to talk about in the lean news months to carry us to camp. Each poll will be open for voting for 24 hours. New threads will only be created on weekdays. Ties will cause a runoff poll.

Simply voting is not enough!

Post why you voted for who you did and provide a player to add to the next poll (every poll will be a list of 10 guys, a new player is added to the list each day).

Here's the thing. There is no criteria. This is an exercise to foster discussion therefore there are no clear criteria for ranking. Who is better right now? Who will have the best season? Who was better last year? Sort of a combo of them all? Do you take positional value into account? It really doesn't matter.

Previous Years:
Rank the Roster: 2014-2019

Gary vs Lazard vs EQSB here for me. I think I could be talked into a ILB, DL, or DB here as well, I don't have a strong opinion on the next guy up at any of those positions.

Turner will NOT be my #5 OL off the board. Not sure yet who will be.

This is Gary and, IMO, he will be more impactful than Jace Sternberger, so he should have won last round.

I am still perplexed by the WR conversations, not to much surprise, I suppose. I need to hear some compelling arguments against Funchess other than his drop rate and his combine speed. He CLEARLY runs faster than that and can make every catch in the book. What I would really like is a reel of all of his drops so we can see exactly what the issue/s are. Concentration? Cam? Good plays by the DB? I fully expect he will see the second most targets on the team after Adams, no matter what we call him or where we play him.

NCF wrote: ↑

22 May 2020 08:09

I am still perplexed by the WR conversations, not to much surprise, I suppose. I need to hear some compelling arguments against Funchess other than his drop rate and his combine speed. He CLEARLY runs faster than that and can make every catch in the book. What I would really like is a reel of all of his drops so we can see exactly what the issue/s are. Concentration? Cam? Good plays by the DB? I fully expect he will see the second most targets on the team after Adams, no matter what we call him or where we play him.

I have learned that Funchess had five drops in one game (against Detroit) in his final season in Carolina; That's between 20-25% of his career drops in one very very bad game. That game skyrocketed his drop rate, while also led to Carolina elevating DJ Moore ahead of him on the depth chart, limited his chances down the line, and probably led to him leaving in free agency.

I've learned that Funchess played in 61 of 64 career games prior to breaking his collarbone last year in Indiannapolis.

I've learned that Funchess' catch % is startlingly low. Like insane low. But if his drop rate only explains a narrow portion of that, there's a lot of unexplained non-catches. I need to learn: was this Cam Newton with poor throws/ball placement? Is this a guy who has a lot of passes defensed against him due to lack of separation? Is this a guy whose measurable catch radius only shows up in flashes on the field? Likely some combination.

I've learned that Funchess does most of his work in the middle of the field. This, to me, explains a lot of the conversation here. It is assumed that Funchess will take the "big slot" role that sometimes was Jimmy Graham (Sterny will take some of those) and mostly was Geronimo Allison.

Now, I've commented earlier that Funchess is basically like a plussed up version of Geronimo--both tall, but Funchess taller; both slow, but Fucnhess a little faster. Both drop the ball at about a 10% drop rate. Both are coach's faves in terms of work ethic and team attitude, though Funchess is bigger and better suited to blocking.

It seems very likely that this big slot who plays over the middle would replace last year's big slot, Allison, and would constitute a slight upgrade there. But it DOESN'T seem likely that this slower WR who has made his mark over the middle of the field will win the #2 outside WR spot. And it doesn't seem likely that a team that drafted 2 3rd-round TEs in a row, a 2nd round RB, and a plethora of OLineman is going to spend more than the league average in 3-WR sets.

So the WR competition focuses on the complete unknown of who will win the starting job opposite Adams, where Lazard eventually was the guy last year, but MVS started the year there. Will it be Lazard? EQSB? Will MVS make a comeback?

And until we figure out the unsettled WR2 role, no one wants to vote for or discuss this slot WR.

And since he signed for a very low number, $2.5M, there's an easy assumption that he's not any good, even though he's coming off of a lost year due to a broken collarbone in which he had signed for $8 million.

Looking like 4 of our top 17 players are going to be from the 2019 draft class. 2 deserved, 2 mostly on projection and increased opportunity. Not sure what that means, lol, but I doubt that has ever happened before for a year 2 draft class.

But think that sounds promising. Getting 4 starters from a draft class would be huge, especially when one of them is already playing at Elgton's level. Even if Gary isn't 'starting', he is the only person standing in his way from getting starter level snaps.

Lazard again for me. He took hold of his opportunity last year and produced. He still has more upside. I project he will be our #2.

I went Gary for the moment. i could be persuaded to jump to lazard. He has the, 'Give me the Ball!" attitude that AR noticed. Don't know how AR will take Bunches of Funchess without the pre-camp stuff. And ESB could easily get back into the mix.

When it came to third down efficiency, the Packers ranked in the bottom half of the league last season. Their third down conversion percentage of just 37.6 percent ranked 19th overall and Aaron Rodgers completed just 54.7 percent of his total passes while posting a passer rating of only 87.5. His lowest on any down.

On third downs in 2019, Lazard was targeted 23 times and hauled in 16 of them for receptions which is a catch rate of nearly 70 percent. On top of that he would total 217 yards at 13.6 yards per catch with two touchdowns. Oh, and did I mention that of his 16 receptions, 15 of them went for a first down?

https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/allen-laz ... um=twitter

Sully, for reasons already explained, same general logic as Lazard (who I think is my second choice).

Looks like Gary will go here, which surprises me a bit, but I am okay with it. He was probably one of my next couple votes. His role will definitely get a lot bigger with Fackrell out, and he could potentially displace Preston Smith in snaps (if not officially).

the harder it is to pick this tier the better i think our team is, there are about 1/2 doz players we could vote on here and all would be a legitimate selection, I had a tough time deciding yesterday between Lazard, Sternberger, Gary, Sullivan, EQSB, and eliminating Sternberger didn't make it any easier, anyway I'll go with Lazard, he earned every snap he got last year and according to reports is motivated and wants more this season, #2 spot I think is his to lose

Gary has more upside but no matter how you look at it, he is behind both Smiths. So unless a Smith gets hurt or they go to a 4-3 with Smith, Clark, Gary and Smith as starters, I don't see how Gary gets enough snaps to deserve consideration at #17

I am staying with Lazard. WR#2 is a full time starter.

I won't argue with Gary at #18.

Then, a pair of rookies. Runyan and Dillon

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

22 May 2020 15:29

Gary has more upside but no matter how you look at it, he is behind both Smiths. So unless a Smith gets hurt or they go to a 4-3 with Smith, Clark, Gary and Smith as starters, I don't see how Gary gets enough snaps to deserve consideration at #17

I am staying with Lazard. WR#2 is a full time starter.

I won't argue with Gary at #18.

Then, a pair of rookies. Runyan and Dillon

Front 5 defenders don’t play every down, Gary can and should get starter level snaps, 60-70% of the snaps, if he is effective.

BF004 wrote: ↑

22 May 2020 15:39

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

22 May 2020 15:29

Gary has more upside but no matter how you look at it, he is behind both Smiths. So unless a Smith gets hurt or they go to a 4-3 with Smith, Clark, Gary and Smith as starters, I don't see how Gary gets enough snaps to deserve consideration at #17

I am staying with Lazard. WR#2 is a full time starter.

I won't argue with Gary at #18.

Then, a pair of rookies. Runyan and Dillon

Front 5 defenders don’t play every down, Gary can and should get starter level snaps, 60-70% of the snaps, if he is effective.

Yeah, Gary's snaps plus Fackrell's snaps in 2019 add up to 63% of the snaps. Meanwhile, The Smiths played 83%, which if Gary is good enough, he could take a bit of a load off of them.

And as it relates to deciding between him or Lazard, WR2 is probably gonna get a similar amount of snaps as a (quote-unquote) starter.

Well Funchess is my #2 WR, so I’ll vote for him before Lazard, but after Gary and maybe Ricky Wagner and/or Billy Turner, maybe even Chandon Sullivan.

I think it's Lazard over Funchess but that the former will not get significantly more snaps than the latter, and that EQ will eat further into both's workload as the year goes on -- with the possibility of overtaking both (which, as far as I'm concerned, is the ideal outcome).

I am also not ready or willing to count out MVS yet.

Labrev wrote: ↑

22 May 2020 22:26

I think it's Lazard over Funchess but that the former will not get significantly more snaps than the latter, and that EQ will eat further into both's workload as the year goes on -- with the possibility of overtaking both (which, as far as I'm concerned, is the ideal outcome).

I am also not ready or willing to count out MVS yet.

EQ may get a lot of snaps from both Lazard and from Adams. But Fuchness is not a WR. A guy who runs a 4.7 40 at the combine and has an unusually low catch rate and has very little quickness is not a WR. He is a slot/TE hybrid, a big slot receiver, a small TE. People can say he plays faster than 4.70 40 but IMO not much, he is almost as tall as Lazard, a few pounds heavier and a whole lot slower with a whole lot worse catch when targeted rate.

WR
#1 Adams
#2 Lazard
#3 EQ
#4 Kumerow
#5 Somebody else not named Fuchness
#6 Some else possibly named Fuchness IF in fact the Packers keep 6. And that is a big IF as I think they will go heavy on real TE's and RB's.

Fuchness may very well make a role for himself but it won't be as WR#2. He is physically incapable of being effective as a wideout.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

23 May 2020 00:37

Labrev wrote: ↑

22 May 2020 22:26

I think it's Lazard over Funchess but that the former will not get significantly more snaps than the latter, and that EQ will eat further into both's workload as the year goes on -- with the possibility of overtaking both (which, as far as I'm concerned, is the ideal outcome).

I am also not ready or willing to count out MVS yet.

EQ may get a lot of snaps from both Lazard and from Adams. But Fuchness is not a WR. A guy who runs a 4.7 40 at the combine and has an unusually low catch rate and has very little quickness is not a WR. He is a slot/TE hybrid, a big slot receiver, a small TE. People can say he plays faster than 4.70 40 but IMO not much, he is almost as tall as Lazard, a few pounds heavier and a whole lot slower with a whole lot worse catch when targeted rate.

WR
#1 Adams
#2 Lazard
#3 EQ
#4 Kumerow
#5 Somebody else not named Fuchness
#6 Some else possibly named Fuchness IF in fact the Packers keep 6. And that is a big IF as I think they will go heavy on real TE's and RB's.

Fuchness may very well make a role for himself but it won't be as WR#2. He is physically incapable of being effective as a wideout.

What makes you come to this conclusion?

Pugger wrote: ↑

24 May 2020 22:54

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

23 May 2020 00:37

Labrev wrote: ↑

22 May 2020 22:26

I think it's Lazard over Funchess but that the former will not get significantly more snaps than the latter, and that EQ will eat further into both's workload as the year goes on -- with the possibility of overtaking both (which, as far as I'm concerned, is the ideal outcome).

I am also not ready or willing to count out MVS yet.

EQ may get a lot of snaps from both Lazard and from Adams. But Fuchness is not a WR. A guy who runs a 4.7 40 at the combine and has an unusually low catch rate and has very little quickness is not a WR. He is a slot/TE hybrid, a big slot receiver, a small TE. People can say he plays faster than 4.70 40 but IMO not much, he is almost as tall as Lazard, a few pounds heavier and a whole lot slower with a whole lot worse catch when targeted rate.

WR
#1 Adams
#2 Lazard
#3 EQ
#4 Kumerow
#5 Somebody else not named Fuchness
#6 Some else possibly named Fuchness IF in fact the Packers keep 6. And that is a big IF as I think they will go heavy on real TE's and RB's.

Fuchness may very well make a role for himself but it won't be as WR#2. He is physically incapable of being effective as a wideout.

What makes you come to this conclusion?

#1 4.7 40 at the Combine, for starters. By comparison Sternberger ran 4.69 and Tonyan ran 4.58. Deguara ran a 4.65. Fuchness is a TE who can also play a big slot. He is not a WR. fyi Lazard and Fuchness are nearly the same height and weight but Lazard ran a 4.56. Lazard can play WR, Fuchness cannot.

#2. Fuchness has one of the worst career catch rates in the NFL at 51.8%. That is horrible. Lazard is 68.6% which is very good.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

25 May 2020 08:28

#1 4.7 40 at the Combine, for starters. By comparison Sternberger ran 4.69 and Tonyan ran 4.58. Deguara ran a 4.65. Fuchness is a TE who can also play a big slot. He is not a WR. fyi Lazard and Fuchness are nearly the same height and weight but Lazard ran a 4.56. Lazard can play WR, Fuchness cannot.

Totally disagree with your assessment. Yes, Funchess ran a 4.7, but that was after putting on weight for the combine when a lot of people did see him as a TE. If we put Lazard and Funchess on the line and run a 40 today, I bet there's not a stone's throw of difference between how either runs.

Also, his Michigan Pro Day, FWIW, was much, much faster.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/239 ... ay-workout

Do I believe he is a sub-4.5 guy? No. But, I think he is a sub-4.6 guy and that is fast enough for this body type... and unlike Lazard, he actually knows how to use his size to his advantage.