March 22, 2019, 05:44:40 AM

Author Topic: GB and the WR position  (Read 1487 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pilprin

  • Rookie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #15 on: March 03, 2019, 04:16:30 AM »
I would add Cole Beasley on a friendly deal...if possible. Otherwise, Isabella or Renfro in this draft interest me as slot guys on day 3.

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2991
  • Karma: +14/-1
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #16 on: March 03, 2019, 07:13:50 AM »
I'd step away from the archetypal "slot" WR and focus on what I believe is the future of the offense. As defenses are putting more and more speed on the field with DBs offenses are going to counter with more traditional 2 TE sets. This will lessen the degree Green Bay will use 3 WR sets as they will be treating their 2 TE sets like 3 WR sets. In addition to running the ball more this will immediately impact the passing game through play action as well as the added bonus of multiple sets that look the same but do different things. This is the type of offense LaFleur wants to run. In fact, I believe this will be the new trend in the league because it attacks what defenses are doing.

As nice as those speedy, gadget WRs are an all around TE is a better idea and more reliable. Just taking the Packers own needs into account, they need a reliable target and blocker at TE, especially for what they want to accomplish.

I believe their WR situation is fine and I've changed my mind on finding a slot WR. Get better talent at TE.

Online craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
  • Karma: +17/-1
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #17 on: March 03, 2019, 07:31:39 AM »
Pilgrin mentioned a slot draft pick on Day 3.  It's possible that they'd both pursue a TE, AND use a 3rd-day pick on a slot.  I think last year was the first this century where they ended up with any value from a 3rd-day receiver pick (first time since Driver?).  So I'm not sure a 3rd-day pick would ever end up solving anything, much less as a rookie. 

But yeah, I think taking a shot with a 3rd-day pick isn't implausible. 

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4933
  • Karma: +32/-2
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #18 on: March 03, 2019, 08:21:16 AM »
I'd step away from the archetypal "slot" WR and focus on what I believe is the future of the offense. As defenses are putting more and more speed on the field with DBs offenses are going to counter with more traditional 2 TE sets. This will lessen the degree Green Bay will use 3 WR sets as they will be treating their 2 TE sets like 3 WR sets. In addition to running the ball more this will immediately impact the passing game through play action as well as the added bonus of multiple sets that look the same but do different things. This is the type of offense LaFleur wants to run. In fact, I believe this will be the new trend in the league because it attacks what defenses are doing.

As nice as those speedy, gadget WRs are an all around TE is a better idea and more reliable. Just taking the Packers own needs into account, they need a reliable target and blocker at TE, especially for what they want to accomplish.

I believe their WR situation is fine and I've changed my mind on finding a slot WR. Get better talent at TE.

I don't disagree that 2 TE's will be a significant part of the new offense, especially because it will bring running the football and play action passing back as a central focus of the offense. This will also help preserve AR's health. (Bonus!)

But having a true slot WR as part of the new offense also makes sense.

As we have seen, the jet sweep has found it's place in the offenses of teams that have influenced MLF as he has grown through the coaching ranks, and I think that it will also be a part of GB's new offense as well. It's just a good idea to keep the options open to this happening.

Finding a Day 3 slot WR, who can also do KR/PR, may be something that GB tries to do.

Offline SET4YRS

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 280
  • Karma: +14/-1
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #19 on: March 03, 2019, 08:53:20 AM »
 We have a new offensive minded coach and it's been a long time since we heavily invested on offense in the early rounds of the draft. Special teams have been a disaster, Davis is great on paper but can't stay healthy and offers nothing on offense. The group of young WRs have potential, but we shouldn't go into the season based on that alone. Rodgers himself was saying toward the end of the year that he needed a consistent slot player. With all that said, it wouldn't shock me if 3 of the first 4 picks in the draft were offense with both TE and the slot being addressed.

 Rodgers is taking a lot of sacks, far more than Favre did. Sure a commitment to the run will help that, but so will a slot player. The days of Jennings/ young Cobb were a thing of beauty carving up defenses.

 Pettine did a great job with what he had. Maybe they bring back players like Wilkerson, CMIII and Breeland. Add a couple more free agents on the defensive side and get back to drafting defense in 2020.


Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2813
  • Karma: +42/-9
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #20 on: March 03, 2019, 09:02:47 AM »
I would add Cole Beasley on a friendly deal...if possible. Otherwise, Isabella or Renfro in this draft interest me as slot guys on day 3.

This from a Cowboys reporter,
 
@calvinwatkins
Follow
Follow @calvinwatkins
 
More
As I leave Indy two things stuck out: Cowboys are not close to finalizing a deal with DeMarcus Lawrence and I expect him to get tagged. Cole Beasley seeks $20 million guaranteed.

Give Cole Beasley $20 Million GUARANTEED. Let that sink it for a few minutes.



Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4933
  • Karma: +32/-2
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #21 on: March 03, 2019, 09:09:36 AM »
I would add Cole Beasley on a friendly deal...if possible. Otherwise, Isabella or Renfro in this draft interest me as slot guys on day 3.

This from a Cowboys reporter,
 
@calvinwatkins
Follow
Follow @calvinwatkins
 
More
As I leave Indy two things stuck out: Cowboys are not close to finalizing a deal with DeMarcus Lawrence and I expect him to get tagged. Cole Beasley seeks $20 million guaranteed.

Give Cole Beasley $20 Million GUARANTEED. Let that sink it for a few minutes.

That's an easy "no way" to check off the list of potential FA slot WR's.

Also, he turns 30 on April 26th.

Pie In The Sky, Beasley!

Online craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
  • Karma: +17/-1
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #22 on: March 03, 2019, 02:05:32 PM »
.....I don't disagree that 2 TE's will be a significant part of the new offense, especially because it will bring running the football and play action passing back as a central focus of the offense. This will also help preserve AR's health. ....

... Rodgers is taking a lot of sacks, far more than Favre did. Sure a commitment to the run will help that, but so will a slot player.....

I'm probably dumb or heretic, but I'm still not confident that commitment to running is going to significantly impact Rodgers' health.   

Last year, most sacks came on 3rd downs.  No coaches in the NFL are committed to running on 3rd and >1, and MLF isn't going to be the first.  When it's 3rd and ≥2, they're going to be passing just like every team in the last 40 years has done. 

Every team blends running and passing.  27 of 32 NFL teams fell within the 54-65% passing range; I expect the Packers will also.  Obviously the difference between throwing 54% vs 65% is significant, but the QB-injury factor is probably shifting by only a few %.   

Also think a lot of risk comes on broken or extended pass plays when the intended targets don't get open as intended.  To some degree, going heavily with run and with blocking-oriented TE's probably sucks more defenders closer to the line.  Why keep safeties and corners deep if throws are all short and quick ones?  More bodies nearer the line, the more guys who aren't too far away to do a surprise blitz, or to apply a hard sack if an intended play breaks down.  Plus more guys close reduces open space for quick throws. 

So I'm suspecting Rodgers injury risk won't be reduced all that much, and we'll still be throwing more than running as does the rest of the league.


Offline SET4YRS

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 280
  • Karma: +14/-1
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #23 on: March 03, 2019, 02:14:30 PM »
 Running the ball creates play action, controlling the clock shortens games and wears down defenses.

Online OneTwoSixFive

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2265
  • Karma: +12/-6
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #24 on: March 03, 2019, 06:11:40 PM »
WR Stanley Morgan (Nebraska) 6'0", 202, 4.53 40, 38.5 vert, 125 broad jump, and the best is his 20shuttle and 3 cone (4.13 and 6.78, second in both only to Miles Boykin).  If the Packers are looking for good athleticism, he could be a consideration in rounds 5-6.

Thedraftnetwork gave a pretty decent report on him.   https://thedraftnetwork.com/player/stanley-morgan-jr
(ricky) "Personally, I'm putting this in a box, driving a stake through its heart, firing a silver bullet into its (empty) head, nailing it shut, loading it into a rocket and firing it into the sun. "

(Pink Floyd) "Set the controls for the heart of the sun"

Online craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3643
  • Karma: +17/-1
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #25 on: March 03, 2019, 07:48:36 PM »
Running the ball creates play action, controlling the clock shortens games and wears down defenses.

The question is whether committing controls the clock.  If it does, why don't more teams than just Seattle run the ball half their snaps?   

It's converting first downs that controls the clock and wears down defenses.  Committing to the run but ending with run-run-pass-punt will not control the clock or wear down defenses or accomplish anything good.

**IF** the Packers suddenly have the personnel to use the run to convert first downs, more power to them.  I hope so!   :)  **IF** they've got the blocking and the backs to be ripping off first-down runs on first and second downs, lets make that happen.  I hope so!   :)

But **if** committing to the run is mostly setting up lots of 3rd-and-6, 3rd-and-5, 3rd-and-4, 3rd-and-3, and 3rd-and-2 downs, then like every other team in the league the Packers will be passing on 3rd down.  As was true last season, on 3rd-downs opposing defenses will be blitzing and putting on the 3rd-down pass rush, and it will be hard to convert and convert and convert and convert. 

I hope the Packers have a superbly high conversion rate on 3rd-down passes.  But it's really key that they convert many first downs without ever getting to 3rd down, and get some chunk plays.  Hopefully between the running game, the screen game, and the passing game that will happen.  A good running game and play-action may help that to happen, I agree.  I hope it happens.   


Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4933
  • Karma: +32/-2
Re: GB and the WR position
« Reply #26 on: March 04, 2019, 04:31:31 PM »