Packer Offseason Thread: Latest- Packers Sign Kenny Clark- 4 years/$70 Million

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I've paid minimal attention to NFL until yesterday, I forgot that I agreed to play in a fantasy football league after intending not to participate in any this year. I looked at rosters for a couple hours and when I got to the Packers skill positions, I was extremely underwhelmed. It's like we took our receiving corps of Adams and bleh from last year, got rid of our 3rd and 4th best options, and ran it back. Even if Rodgers is indeed primed for an FU year after the draft, he doesn't appear to have the weapons. We seem better setup to run big sets and run and work play action. A lot of 1 and 2 wr sets with 2 te and sometimes 2 rb. I just don't see how our offense is successful unless we run that type of offense.

 

Unless the defense takes a big step forward, this feels like a 7-9 team to me. That's possible I suppose since I know we made it a priority in the off season again.

 

How does a team that didn't really lose anything of note personnel wise in the offseason (besides maybe Bulaga) take a 6-game swing record-wise? And who are you saying are the 3rd and 4th best options? Allison and Kumerow? Graham? Those guys are very, very replaceable.

 

I mean, I understand the idea that last year's team perhaps outperformed its talent level, but 7-9? Really?

 

Last years team was not a 13-3 team. They probably played to the caliber of a 9-7 or 10-6 team but had a few breaks go their way. I just don't see how we're going to score enough. The only way this team can get to that 10-6 level again is if we can keep teams in the teens in scoring pretty consistently.

 

I was referring to Allison and Kumerow. I'm aware they are replaceable, but the guys replacing them are slightly worse players on paper...and those 2 guys really aren't very good to begin with. We appear to be embarrassingly bad at WR beyond Adams. I'm not really counting Graham as our 2 young tight ends will probably be as good or better than him. Unless some of the young wr take a massive step forward, or one or both of our young tight ends break out in a big way...we're going to struggle to score.

 

Allison and Kumerow were steady players, with zero upside. MVS is about as unsteady as you can get, but the upside is substantial. ESB is pretty much a blank slate right now. He flashed some ability his rookie year, but was not consistent enough to get any sort of read on. I would say that saying the WR corp is "embarrassingly bad" would be accurate if you are going by name recognition. But when looking at talent, it's there. The chance they are taking, though, is depending on those two young guys to take a big jump.

 

The thing is, the offense didn't struggle to score too badly with Adams and a bunch of bums at WR last year, and with a very over-the-hill Graham clogging up the TE spot. Heck, they were better when Adams was missing, with Lazard and the RBs leading the way in the passing game. I don't see how they are going to suddenly struggle now.

[KeithStone53151]

Last years team was not a 13-3 team. They probably played to the caliber of a 9-7 or 10-6 team but had a few breaks go their way. I just don't see how we're going to score enough. The only way this team can get to that 10-6 level again is if we can keep teams in the teens in scoring pretty consistently.

 

I was referring to Allison and Kumerow. I'm aware they are replaceable, but the guys replacing them are slightly worse players on paper...and those 2 guys really aren't very good to begin with. We appear to be embarrassingly bad at WR beyond Adams. I'm not really counting Graham as our 2 young tight ends will probably be as good or better than him. Unless some of the young wr take a massive step forward, or one or both of our young tight ends break out in a big way...we're going to struggle to score.

 

Allison and Kumerow were steady players, with zero upside. MVS is about as unsteady as you can get, but the upside is substantial. ESB is pretty much a blank slate right now. He flashed some ability his rookie year, but was not consistent enough to get any sort of read on. I would say that saying the WR corp is "embarrassingly bad" would be accurate if you are going by name recognition. But when looking at talent, it's there. The chance they are taking, though, is depending on those two young guys to take a big jump.

 

The thing is, the offense didn't struggle to score too badly with Adams and a bunch of bums at WR last year, and with a very over-the-hill Graham clogging up the TE spot. Heck, they were better when Adams was missing, with Lazard and the RBs leading the way in the passing game. I don't see how they are going to suddenly struggle now.

 

Last year, the Packers were 18th in total yards per game, 17th in pass yards per game, 16th in scoring per game. We were also similarly middle of the pack in defensive stats. The only major stat we were way above average was turnovers, being +12...good for 3rd best in the league. Basically we were an average team that did a great job taking care of the ball. That's not good enough for 13-3. And maintaining is simply not good enough in the NFL. When you look around, almost every team is getting better through the draft or free agency...while we did basically nothing to improve our offense. You need to be getting more better than the other teams to truly improve.

[KeithStone53151]

Last years team was not a 13-3 team. They probably played to the caliber of a 9-7 or 10-6 team but had a few breaks go their way. I just don't see how we're going to score enough. The only way this team can get to that 10-6 level again is if we can keep teams in the teens in scoring pretty consistently.

 

I was referring to Allison and Kumerow. I'm aware they are replaceable, but the guys replacing them are slightly worse players on paper...and those 2 guys really aren't very good to begin with. We appear to be embarrassingly bad at WR beyond Adams. I'm not really counting Graham as our 2 young tight ends will probably be as good or better than him. Unless some of the young wr take a massive step forward, or one or both of our young tight ends break out in a big way...we're going to struggle to score.

 

Allison and Kumerow were steady players, with zero upside. MVS is about as unsteady as you can get, but the upside is substantial. ESB is pretty much a blank slate right now. He flashed some ability his rookie year, but was not consistent enough to get any sort of read on. I would say that saying the WR corp is "embarrassingly bad" would be accurate if you are going by name recognition. But when looking at talent, it's there. The chance they are taking, though, is depending on those two young guys to take a big jump.

 

The thing is, the offense didn't struggle to score too badly with Adams and a bunch of bums at WR last year, and with a very over-the-hill Graham clogging up the TE spot. Heck, they were better when Adams was missing, with Lazard and the RBs leading the way in the passing game. I don't see how they are going to suddenly struggle now.

 

Last year, the Packers were 18th in total yards per game, 17th in pass yards per game, 16th in scoring per game. We were also similarly middle of the pack in defensive stats. The only major stat we were way above average was turnovers, being +12...good for 3rd best in the league. Basically we were an average team that did a great job taking care of the ball. That's not good enough for 13-3. And maintaining is simply not good enough in the NFL. When you look around, almost every team is getting better through the draft or free agency...while we did basically nothing to improve our offense. You need to be getting more better than the other teams to truly improve.

[PeaveyFury]

If the over/under on MVS & St. Brown's performance this year is to merely surpass the performance of Allison/Kumerow, I'll take the over every day of the week.

[PeaveyFury]

If the over/under on MVS & St. Brown's performance this year is to merely surpass the performance of Allison/Kumerow, I'll take the over every day of the week.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

When you look around, almost every team is getting better through the draft or free agency...while we did basically nothing to improve our offense. You need to be getting more better than the other teams to truly improve.

 

There are many more, and I'd argue much better ways to improve a team than simply through outside player acquisition. Isn't it entirely possible that the current personnel's 2nd year in the offensive scheme could very well lead to improvement? As for player acquisition, sometimes it's a case of the grass not always being greener. The team added a tailback and an H-back that fit the offensive scheme that Lafleur intends to run. They have Lazard back, who flashed as a rookie last year. They have St. Brown back, who flashed as a rookie in 2018. The stories about MVS improving may be smoke, but there may be something legit there, too. Adams didn't make the jump until his 3rd year after looking pretty terrible his 2nd year.

 

But saying that an offense can't improve without adding different and/or new pieces is just not true.

 

I mean, I totally get that they aren't really a talented enough team on paper to warrant a 13-3 record. But they did it, and that matters. This team is better talent-wise than a 7-win squad.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

When you look around, almost every team is getting better through the draft or free agency...while we did basically nothing to improve our offense. You need to be getting more better than the other teams to truly improve.

 

There are many more, and I'd argue much better ways to improve a team than simply through outside player acquisition. Isn't it entirely possible that the current personnel's 2nd year in the offensive scheme could very well lead to improvement? As for player acquisition, sometimes it's a case of the grass not always being greener. The team added a tailback and an H-back that fit the offensive scheme that Lafleur intends to run. They have Lazard back, who flashed as a rookie last year. They have St. Brown back, who flashed as a rookie in 2018. The stories about MVS improving may be smoke, but there may be something legit there, too. Adams didn't make the jump until his 3rd year after looking pretty terrible his 2nd year.

 

But saying that an offense can't improve without adding different and/or new pieces is just not true.

 

I mean, I totally get that they aren't really a talented enough team on paper to warrant a 13-3 record. But they did it, and that matters. This team is better talent-wise than a 7-win squad.

[nodakfan17]

I’m not sold on the overall talent level, but I think they’ll benefit from the year-over-year continuity and still contend for the division.

 

Probable Wins:

vs Lions (2)

vs Falcons (4)

vs Vikings (8)

vs Jaguars (10)

vs Bears (12)

@ Lions (14)

vs Panthers (15)

vs Titans (16)

@ Bears (17)

 

Probable Losses:

@ Vikings (1)

@ Saints (3)

@ Buccaneers (6)

@ Texans (7)

@ 49ers (9)

 

Toss-Ups: (assume they split)

@ Colts (11)

vs Eagles (13)

 

10-6 Overall

[nodakfan17]

I’m not sold on the overall talent level, but I think they’ll benefit from the year-over-year continuity and still contend for the division.

 

Probable Wins:

vs Lions (2)

vs Falcons (4)

vs Vikings (8)

vs Jaguars (10)

vs Bears (12)

@ Lions (14)

vs Panthers (15)

vs Titans (16)

@ Bears (17)

 

Probable Losses:

@ Vikings (1)

@ Saints (3)

@ Buccaneers (6)

@ Texans (7)

@ 49ers (9)

 

Toss-Ups: (assume they split)

@ Colts (11)

vs Eagles (13)

 

10-6 Overall

[adambr2]

When you look around, almost every team is getting better through the draft or free agency...while we did basically nothing to improve our offense. You need to be getting more better than the other teams to truly improve.

 

There are many more, and I'd argue much better ways to improve a team than simply through outside player acquisition. Isn't it entirely possible that the current personnel's 2nd year in the offensive scheme could very well lead to improvement? As for player acquisition, sometimes it's a case of the grass not always being greener. The team added a tailback and an H-back that fit the offensive scheme that Lafleur intends to run. They have Lazard back, who flashed as a rookie last year. They have St. Brown back, who flashed as a rookie in 2018. The stories about MVS improving may be smoke, but there may be something legit there, too. Adams didn't make the jump until his 3rd year after looking pretty terrible his 2nd year.

 

But saying that an offense can't improve without adding different and/or new pieces is just not true.

 

I mean, I totally get that they aren't really a talented enough team on paper to warrant a 13-3 record. But they did it, and that matters. This team is better talent-wise than a 7-win squad.

 

St. Brown was a 6th round pick who caught 21 balls in 2018 for just over 300 yards. It's a stretch to call that flashing. I just don't see a lot of surrounding talent, Lazard was a nice surprise last year but reality is there are a million of these late round/undrafted guys that we see stories on, we talk them up, but the vast majority of them make little to no impact. That applied to Jarrett Boykin, Geronimo Allison, Jeff Janis, Jared Abbrederris..the list goes on and on. Late round success stories at WR aren't unheard of, but they're extremely rare because you basically have 32 GMs who all underestimated the talent.

 

I would love a big year from MVS, ESB, or Lazard...but my expectations aren't high. It's tough to compare MVS to Adams who was a heralded 2nd round pick and always known to have the talent to excel at this level.

 

I think there's a wide spectrum of possible outcomes for this team, from maybe 6 to 11 wins depending on the bounces of the ball. Last year we were on the extreme upper end of the spectrum.

[adambr2]

When you look around, almost every team is getting better through the draft or free agency...while we did basically nothing to improve our offense. You need to be getting more better than the other teams to truly improve.

 

There are many more, and I'd argue much better ways to improve a team than simply through outside player acquisition. Isn't it entirely possible that the current personnel's 2nd year in the offensive scheme could very well lead to improvement? As for player acquisition, sometimes it's a case of the grass not always being greener. The team added a tailback and an H-back that fit the offensive scheme that Lafleur intends to run. They have Lazard back, who flashed as a rookie last year. They have St. Brown back, who flashed as a rookie in 2018. The stories about MVS improving may be smoke, but there may be something legit there, too. Adams didn't make the jump until his 3rd year after looking pretty terrible his 2nd year.

 

But saying that an offense can't improve without adding different and/or new pieces is just not true.

 

I mean, I totally get that they aren't really a talented enough team on paper to warrant a 13-3 record. But they did it, and that matters. This team is better talent-wise than a 7-win squad.

 

St. Brown was a 6th round pick who caught 21 balls in 2018 for just over 300 yards. It's a stretch to call that flashing. I just don't see a lot of surrounding talent, Lazard was a nice surprise last year but reality is there are a million of these late round/undrafted guys that we see stories on, we talk them up, but the vast majority of them make little to no impact. That applied to Jarrett Boykin, Geronimo Allison, Jeff Janis, Jared Abbrederris..the list goes on and on. Late round success stories at WR aren't unheard of, but they're extremely rare because you basically have 32 GMs who all underestimated the talent.

 

I would love a big year from MVS, ESB, or Lazard...but my expectations aren't high. It's tough to compare MVS to Adams who was a heralded 2nd round pick and always known to have the talent to excel at this level.

 

I think there's a wide spectrum of possible outcomes for this team, from maybe 6 to 11 wins depending on the bounces of the ball. Last year we were on the extreme upper end of the spectrum.

[CheezWizHed]

A lot of 1 and 2 wr sets with 2 te and sometimes 2 rb. I just don't see how our offense is successful unless we run that type of offense.

 

I think this is a key shift in focus that is key to why they didn't invest heavily in the WR position. They DO expect to run many more heavy sets. That is why the investments they made were at TE and RB more than WR.

 

Last year, our top 3 three receivers (by reception) were Adams, Jones, and Williams - who will all be back. Graham and Allison were the 4th and 6th option (38 receptions and 447 yards & 26/452). As much as we liked Kumerow, he put up 12/251 last year which is very replaceable.

 

If Lazard just plays equal to what he did last year, the additional games played would have him go from 35/477 in 11 games to 51/694 in 16 games, which would replace Kumerow. But I also expect him to get many more opportunities. I think a 70/900 season isn't out of the question.

 

MVS was injured in week 7 and did very little the rest of the season. Assuming he could've continued his original pace, he would've finished with 48/951 instead of 26/452. That would replace Allision alone.

 

Between Tonyan, Deguara, and Sternberger, I don't see any problems with improving on Graham's 38/447 plus Tonyan's 10/100. Lewis had 15/156 last year, which he should be able to maintain.

 

ESB put up 21/328 in 2018. So I think he can easily put that up again.

 

Yes, this year's offense is very volatile - TE lost a lot of experience but didn't have much for numbers last year anyway. Lazard, MVS, and ESB are all young and low draft picks. But they should be able to duplicate their numbers pretty easily while still having a lot of upside.

 

It wasn't the big talent boosts we wanted at WR, but unless the o-line becomes wet-tissue paper, I'd really be surprised if they can't exceed last year's offensive numbers.

[HiAndTight]

 

St. Brown was a 6th round pick who caught 21 balls in 2018 for just over 300 yards. It's a stretch to call that flashing. I just don't see a lot of surrounding talent, Lazard was a nice surprise last year but reality is there are a million of these late round/undrafted guys that we see stories on, we talk them up, but the vast majority of them make little to no impact. That applied to Jarrett Boykin, Geronimo Allison, Jeff Janis, Jared Abbrederris..the list goes on and on. Late round success stories at WR aren't unheard of, but they're extremely rare because you basically have 32 GMs who all underestimated the talent.

 

I would love a big year from MVS, ESB, or Lazard...but my expectations aren't high. It's tough to compare MVS to Adams who was a heralded 2nd round pick and always known to have the talent to excel at this level.

 

I think there's a wide spectrum of possible outcomes for this team, from maybe 6 to 11 wins depending on the bounces of the ball. Last year we were on the extreme upper end of the spectrum.

 

Is St. Brown was the 2nd-3rd round pick he was projected to be, would that somehow make you feel better?

 

And when someone says a player "flashed" they're OBVIOUSLY not saying he had a great full season as a raw 21 year old, they're saying he showed signs and had some bursts that showed he could be a productive NFL player.

 

 

I keep seeing this " he was a 6th round pick." That doesn't matter anymore. He's in the NFL...he has the size and speed. Nobody cares anymore where a guy was drafted. Especially a guy who was as highly touted(and who people always knew had the talent...particularly if you read his draft profiles).

 

 

Another promising pass-catcher whose potential far outweighs his college stats, St. Brown is a tall, lean target who will be an NFL quarterback’s dream, both down the field and in the red zone. His impressive combination of height and catch radius will make it extremely difficult for opposing defenders to beat him to the ball.

 

Still just scratching the surface of his potential, St. Brown’s upside is through the roof, and he’ll only get better with some added bulk. If he’s able to add a few pounds of quality muscle and continue refining his natural skills, he could develop into one of the best playmakers to come out of this year’s deep receiver class.

 

He had 58 catches for 958 yards and 9 TD's with just a serviceable QB, came back to Brian Windbrush or whoever and was projected to be a day 2 pick.

 

 

EQ write up coming out of last year;

 

 

St. Brown, who surprisingly slid into the sixth round of the 2018 draft despite his blend of size and speed (4.48 in the 40), caught 21 passes for 328 yards and zero touchdowns as a rookie. He saved his best for last, with five catches for 94 yards against the Jets. While he caught only 61.7 percent of targeted passes, he had zero drops and finished third on the team with 1.31 yards per route – better than Marquez Valdes-Scantling’s 1.22 and Randall Cobb’s 1.13.

 

 

There's plenty of reason to be optimistic about EQ. You listed a bunch of guys who did nothing in the NFL(none of who had his size and athletic ability and came out about 3 years older than EQ) and one guy who had about 9 concussions and couldn't stay healthy. And why do we always hear about fliers the Packers took on guys? What about Ty Hill, AB, Emanuel Sanders, Brandon Marshall, Pierre Garcon, Steve Smith, Michael Thomas...

 

The guy's shown he has talent. He's still just 23 years old(younger than any of those guys in their rookie years IIRC) and he still has that 6'5 215 LB frame with that 4.48 speed and put up a monster season as a Soph for ND.

 

Lets not compare that to Jeff Janis or Boykins or others who never possessed a fraction of his talent and who still had 2 years left of College left by the time EQ was starting his 3rd NFL season.

[HiAndTight]

A lot of 1 and 2 wr sets with 2 te and sometimes 2 rb. I just don't see how our offense is successful unless we run that type of offense.

 

I think this is a key shift in focus that is key to why they didn't invest heavily in the WR position. They DO expect to run many more heavy sets. That is why the investments they made were at TE and RB more than WR.

 

Last year, our top 3 three receivers (by reception) were Adams, Jones, and Williams - who will all be back. Graham and Allison were the 4th and 6th option (38 receptions and 447 yards & 26/452). As much as we liked Kumerow, he put up 12/251 last year which is very replaceable.

 

If Lazard just plays equal to what he did last year, the additional games played would have him go from 35/477 in 11 games to 51/694 in 16 games, which would replace Kumerow. But I also expect him to get many more opportunities. I think a 70/900 season isn't out of the question.

 

MVS was injured in week 7 and did very little the rest of the season. Assuming he could've continued his original pace, he would've finished with 48/951 instead of 26/452. That would replace Allision alone.

 

Between Tonyan, Deguara, and Sternberger, I don't see any problems with improving on Graham's 38/447 plus Tonyan's 10/100. Lewis had 15/156 last year, which he should be able to maintain.

 

ESB put up 21/328 in 2018. So I think he can easily put that up again.

 

Yes, this year's offense is very volatile - TE lost a lot of experience but didn't have much for numbers last year anyway. Lazard, MVS, and ESB are all young and low draft picks. But they should be able to duplicate their numbers pretty easily while still having a lot of upside.

 

It wasn't the big talent boosts we wanted at WR, but unless the o-line becomes wet-tissue paper, I'd really be surprised if they can't exceed last year's offensive numbers.

 

 

I don't agree with that. I'll take them at their word rather than think they felt the WR'er position was less important than the RB position and or a H back.

 

Even teams that run the ball a lot STILL throw the ball over half the time. The Ravens who had an all time great season(set the NFL record) for rushing ran the ball 54 pct of the time and many of those were passing plays that Lamar.

 

That was by FAR the most. Even the Titans, the team that "road Derek Henry to the AFCCG" threw the ball more often than they passed it.

 

I think what the Packers mean by they want to run the ball isn't they are devaluing the WR'ers, I think they want to become a more physically team.

 

But it's 2020 an the passing game, ESPECIALLY when you have Rodgers and you draft a guy because you believe he has Mahomes type upside...so I'll just take their word for it that the WR'ers they liked went off the board before they could get one and by the point they were back on the clock, they didn't feel the players available were better than St. Brown or MVS(Who was dealing with a pretty significant injury last year that we didn't know about while the other was out for the year with an ankle injury).

 

 

I mean....I get the premise, they want more physical players and they want to try and change their identity. I still believe if the Packers happened to end up with a top 5 pick in this upcoming draft, there's a VERY good chance they'd take Chase with a top 5 pick. They're still gonna be airing it out 55+ pct of thee time and they still have one of the top QB's to ever do it.

[CheezWizHed]

Yes, of course they are going to throw the ball more than they run it. No one insinuated that, especially with Rodgers under center. But they will also be more balanced than under MM. And the main premise of the heavier set personnel is that you can run or pass out of those sets. Obviously, having RBs as Rodger's #2 and #3 targets last year suggest that too.

 

But you are swapping out Graham/Vitale for Sternberger/Deguara which makes for a better rush/pass balance. Graham blocked last year, but it certainly wasn't his forte. Vitale caught some passes, but they never seemed to go anywhere. I think the Packers are trying to go the way of the Brewers (aka Team Versatile) and be less predictable with the personnel they put on the field.

 

I do believe that the Packers also though much more of their WRs then most anyone else (included fans). I'm starting to see why as I did this write up. I do believe MVS was more injured than was let on. He was out there, but his production just dropped off the table. But he was nearly on a 1000 yard rate (of 50 catches) before his injury. Likewise, Lazard really came on late in the season. If both of those guys can play to their potential, they will have a strong top 3 WR core. ESB is almost like a draft pick that comes in knowing the offense already. Both ESB and MVS have top WR size/speed combos, but needed refinement on routes and consistency. Of all people the Packer coaches and GM are going to know if that growth is happening or if they need to look elsewhere.

[homer]

If the over/under on MVS & St. Brown's performance this year is to merely surpass the performance of Allison/Kumerow, I'll take the over every day of the week.

 

Bill Schroeder begat Jeff Janis begat Jake Kumerow

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I've paid minimal attention to NFL until yesterday, I forgot that I agreed to play in a fantasy football league after intending not to participate in any this year. I looked at rosters for a couple hours and when I got to the Packers skill positions, I was extremely underwhelmed. It's like we took our receiving corps of Adams and bleh from last year, got rid of our 3rd and 4th best options, and ran it back. Even if Rodgers is indeed primed for an FU year after the draft, he doesn't appear to have the weapons. We seem better setup to run big sets and run and work play action. A lot of 1 and 2 wr sets with 2 te and sometimes 2 rb. I just don't see how our offense is successful unless we run that type of offense.

 

Unless the defense takes a big step forward, this feels like a 7-9 team to me. That's possible I suppose since I know we made it a priority in the off season again.

 

How does a team that didn't really lose anything of note personnel wise in the offseason (besides maybe Bulaga) take a 6-game swing record-wise? And who are you saying are the 3rd and 4th best options? Allison and Kumerow? Graham? Those guys are very, very replaceable.

 

I mean, I understand the idea that last year's team perhaps outperformed its talent level, but 7-9? Really?

 

Well, they did exactly this, a 7-game swing actually, the year Rodgers replaced Favre. It would be easy to say that was a huge change, but Rodgers played quite well and surely did not account for 7 losses. I think it's a relevant comparison because that Packers team in 07 was received much the same way the '19 team was. One that came out of nowhere, "overachieved," had a lot of young guys, and a lot of skepticism. In '08, they had truly miserable luck, losing 7 of their 10 losses by 4 points or less.

 

If Rodgers is healthy I think this team is too good to win 7 games, but nothing in football really surprised me. An unlucky year where a few key guys get hurt and you drop those toss-up games and going 8-8 just wouldn't be terribly shocking.

[CheezWizHed]

 

But you are swapping out Graham/Vitale for Sternberger/Deguara which makes for a better rush/pass balance. Graham blocked last year, but it certainly wasn't his forte. Vitale caught some passes, but they never seemed to go anywhere. I think the Packers are trying to go the way of the Brewers (aka Team Versatile) and be less predictable with the personnel they put on the field.

 

One more thought about increased usage of heavy personnel... it will reduce 3 and 4 WR sets, thus reducing the need for WR depth and increasing the need for more TE/HB/RB depth. That doesn't necessarily mean fewer passes, just doing it with fewer WRs on the field more often.

[adambr2]

Luck plays a huge part in an NFL season record. There's only 16 games and a lot of parity. In an MLB season you have 162 games, good teams are usually in the playoffs and the bad teams are not. Luck usually evens out over that long of a season.

 

Not unusual for a 12-4 paper tiger in an NFL season or a good 6-10 team, just not enough of a season for luck to even out.

[HiAndTight]

Yes, of course they are going to throw the ball more than they run it. No one insinuated that, especially with Rodgers under center. But they will also be more balanced than under MM. And the main premise of the heavier set personnel is that you can run or pass out of those sets. Obviously, having RBs as Rodger's #2 and #3 targets last year suggest that too.

 

But you are swapping out Graham/Vitale for Sternberger/Deguara which makes for a better rush/pass balance. Graham blocked last year, but it certainly wasn't his forte. Vitale caught some passes, but they never seemed to go anywhere. I think the Packers are trying to go the way of the Brewers (aka Team Versatile) and be less predictable with the personnel they put on the field.

 

I do believe that the Packers also though much more of their WRs then most anyone else (included fans). I'm starting to see why as I did this write up. I do believe MVS was more injured than was let on. He was out there, but his production just dropped off the table. But he was nearly on a 1000 yard rate (of 50 catches) before his injury. Likewise, Lazard really came on late in the season. If both of those guys can play to their potential, they will have a strong top 3 WR core. ESB is almost like a draft pick that comes in knowing the offense already. Both ESB and MVS have top WR size/speed combos, but needed refinement on routes and consistency. Of all people the Packer coaches and GM are going to know if that growth is happening or if they need to look elsewhere.

 

 

Agree all the way. I swore you said something about how they devalued the WR'er position or they were devaluing it with their new scheme which you did not say, so that's my mistake.

 

Yes, they want to be more balanced. Not even so much in the run pass ratio, but in McCarthy's last year here, I think 76 pct of the time they lined up in a 11 personnel. Little surprising to see that McCarthy was a bit more balanced than I'd thought for most of his career running the ball ~43 pct of the time until his final 3 years, the only 3 he was under 40 and he ran it just 33 pct of the time in 2018.

 

 

Anyway, whilst trying to forget about the Bucks Meltdown, I'd stumbled on to some interesting articles about the Packers(the interesting ones are the ones that confirm what I already think!).

 

This is a nice one on Tonyan.

https://dairylandexpress.com/2020/07/16/green-bay-packers-is-2020-robert-tonyans-year/

[CheezWizHed]

Agree all the way. I swore you said something about how they devalued the WR'er position or they were devaluing it with their new scheme which you did not say, so that's my mistake.

 

Well, kind of. I think the scheme will tend to use fewer 3 and 4 WR lineups, so the need for a WR wasn't as significant. Their focus seemed to be more at adding receivers at the TE and RB position (well, we will see if AJ can catch) instead of more WRs. So the WR position is devauled a bit (so it seems by their offseason's actions*), but not necessarily devaluing passing.

 

*noting that I think three things really drove the lack of WR focus in the offseason: Love dropping to them, liking the TE/RB options over the WR options in the 2nd/3rd rounds, and expecting a bigger development from MVS, ESB, and Lazard than "the pundits"(i.e. better options than available in the 5th+round).

[CheeseheadInQC]

The Packers' luck might be a bit overstated but yah, they could stand to improve offensively, whether it be getting a second year in the system, Lazard proving last year wasn't a fluke and doing it for a full season or MVS taking the kind of leap that his athleticism makes him capable of.

 

Never been a big St. Brown guy, but I am more intrigued by Taylor than the usual practice squad holdover. He seems like the kind of guy the practice squad is made for (athletic, small school talent who needs a year to adjust to the big jump in competition). Hopefully he's been paying attention to Adams as far as route-running and the like. Given some of their similarities, he seems like the perfect guy for Taylor to emulate.

[HiAndTight]

Agree all the way. I swore you said something about how they devalued the WR'er position or they were devaluing it with their new scheme which you did not say, so that's my mistake.

 

Well, kind of. I think the scheme will tend to use fewer 3 and 4 WR lineups, so the need for a WR wasn't as significant. Their focus seemed to be more at adding receivers at the TE and RB position (well, we will see if AJ can catch) instead of more WRs. So the WR position is devauled a bit (so it seems by their offseason's actions*), but not necessarily devaluing passing.

 

*noting that I think three things really drove the lack of WR focus in the offseason: Love dropping to them, liking the TE/RB options over the WR options in the 2nd/3rd rounds, and expecting a bigger development from MVS, ESB, and Lazard than "the pundits"(i.e. better options than available in the 5th+round).

 

 

Maybe it's just semantics. I don't think they place any less value on the position in terms of acquiring impact talent...they're just not going to keep 7 guys like they did at times in the past.

 

 

It's also not like we went from playing 5 wide to lining up with 2 TE's 75 pct of the time. LaFleur's still used 3 Wide on ~65 pct of the snaps last year.

 

They obviously really like the two young guys. But I'd be willing to bet if they were offered the same deal that the Texans offered the Cards for D-Hop, they'd have jumped at it and been willing to give him the extension he got.

[CheezWizHed]

D-hop trade, yes. Extension... not sure they could do him and Rodgers both. Granted, that might be short term... But you need to acquire talent when you can.

 

I don't think they will ever line up with two TEs 75% of the time unless Sternberger and Tonyan suddenly become very Kittle-like.

 

But I don't think last year is a good indicator of this year either. It normally takes a few years to transform a roster into what you need. That is the main point I was trying to make about the draft. I think they were intentional about getting players that fit the system we want to run.

 

I'm not sure how much of a shift we will see, but if you are running 75% of your plays (MM) with 3+ WRs, you need 4-5 talented WRs plus 2 development types to run a full season. If that decreases to 60%, you can probably get away with 3-4 talented WRs with 1-2 development types.

 

But yeah, if a superstar at any position is available for cheap (ala D-Hop), I'd hope they would grab him anyway. Not like ESB is going to keep a player of that caliber off the field. I'm not saying they didn't try to upgrade the WR spot, but it wasn't the priority others (including me) thought it would be in the offseason.