September 15, 2019, 02:38:53 AM

Author Topic: True needs vs perceived needs  (Read 2081 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline footballdad

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 170
  • Karma: +15/-0
True needs vs perceived needs
« on: February 10, 2019, 07:23:10 AM »
Just laying it out as I see it. Does not mean I'm right.
Offense:

1) QB - We have Rogers, Kizer, and Boyle. Future HOF and two young guys. Are either of the young guys capable of stepping in and keeping a team in contention if AR goes down? At this point, probably not. I would not draft a qb but would consider adding a vet. Reason? Add experience to the qb room. Someone who knows their place but could serve as a mentor to a young guy and help keep AR real. Not a real high priority, but would be nice.

2) OL - Lot of ifs there. From a "right now" perspective, "if" the starters stay healthy we would be ok. "If" Spriggs takes the next step as well.  Do not care for the odds of either. Cole Madison is a wildcard here. I would look to add a guard and a tackle in the draft.

3) TE - We have an old Jimmy Graham and a young Tonyan. Neither one is a threat as a blocker or helping out in the running game. IMO a do-it-all TE is a true need. IF TJ Hockenson is there at pick 30, I would not hesitate for one second. Would strongly consider him at 12 as well. Do not be surprised if he is gone by 12. He is that good.

4) WR - Have a true # 1 in Adams. A lot of raw talent. Would look to possibly adding a true slot guy. Kumerow could possibly be that guy. Maybe not.

5) RB/FB - Williams seems durable and assignment sure. Not a pro bowler but a solid #2. Jones shows flashes of being a #1, but durability is an issue. I would like to see them add someone with a similar skill set to Jones. Thinking Darrell Henderson or Justice Hill in the draft. Could make the case for a pounder, but we do have Williams and Vitale.

Defense:

1) Edge/OLB - Yes, it is a need. There are some ifs and buts though. Sacks in Pettine's defense come from being assignment sure and holding the edge moreso than being a Khalil Mack type and just flat out beating the tackle. The question is though, is it by necessity or design? Don't know. Would it be great to have someone like Mack? Great big yes on that. Is it a requirement though? Nick Perry will be paid 14 million this year. "If" he is healthy, he looks to be a perfect fit. Pack needs to poop or get off the pot here. I would take the risk and the big cap hit and let him go. Look at making a hard run at Preston Smith in free agency and drafting one (Jackson , Miller, Nelson) later. I know most will not agree.

2) DL - In and of itself, currently looks good providing Daniels and Clark remain healthy. Moving forward to 2020, not so much. If a guy like Gary, Oliver, or Wilkins is there at 12 he would have to be a strong consideration.

3) ILB - Not an immediate super pressing area IMO. Martinez, Morrison, and Burks. Would look to add to the group at some point in the draft. Having said that, Devin White is among my favorite players in the draft.

4) CB - Not a big area of need, at least at face value. Alexander and Jackson are keepers. Will King ever be healthy? Since you can never have too many, would look to add to this group mid to later rounds.

5) S - To me the biggest area of need. Williams is 36. Jones is a great athlete that may never realize his potential. I would look at adding both a FS and a SS type. Some good , solid, types available in both the draft and free agency. Would look at adding one in both.

Realizing it is virtually impossible to fix eveything in one year, my off season would look like this, providing drafted players are available.

QB - ?
OL - Dalton Risner - pick #30
TE - Jesse James (FA)
WR -
RB - Justice Hill - pick #111
Edge/OLB - Preston Smith (FA) and Joe Jackson - pick #75
DL - Christian Wilkins - pick #12
ILB - Khalil Hodge - pick #107
CB -
S - Adrian Amos (FA) and Juan Thornhill - pick #44

Work in progress.............

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5279
  • Karma: +43/-2
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2019, 09:28:04 AM »
 goodpost

Good stuff fbd.

Agree with you on a lot of points.

QB - pass for now. Up grading the backup QB position would cost too much, and GB needs to be spending it's cap space in other places. Guy's like Colt McCoy, Teddie Bridgewater, etc. are all getting paid $4M - $6M - up to $10M. No thanks.

OL - drafting a starting caliber OG and 1-2 OT's to develop should be considered. ideally, OT's that can be both swing T's and could slide into OG in a pinch.

TE - I'm changing my tune on Hockenson. I'm in favor of taking him at #12 if he's still there. He could become a perennial all-pro for years, and could be the stick that stirs the drink for the new offense MLF wants to install.

WR - Looking for a Slot WR/KR would be smart. This "new age" offense we keep hearing about requires multiple types of body sizes and skill sets to take advantage of different personnel packages. I prefer drafting one in the back end of the draft.

RB - Totally agree on drafting a RB, especially one with similar size/abilities of AJ. But, also sign a FA with a different body type. I prefer Mike Davis (SEA). Don't be surprised if MLF wants to keep 4 RB's plus FB/H-Back Vitale.

Edge - 100% in favor of courting Preston Smith. I would also be in favor of trying to get Shaquil Barrett to pair with Smith. Two guys who may be in the process of blossoming. Adding another Edge in the draft makes sense as well (Joe Jackson in the 4th)

DL - It's such a deep DL draft ("generational" according to several people). Quality will still be there in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Will be interesting to see what MLF/MP think about some of the younger guys they have on the roster, and how many DL they may want to keep.

ILB - Oren Burks played with a bum shoulder this last year, and I believe it seriously hampered/limited him. I'd add another in the draft. I like Tre Lamar/Clemson.

CB - Resigning Bashaud Breeland would be nice to see. Curious what they see Josh Jackson's future as (CB? or S?). If they think he's better suited at Safety, then there may be a draft pick added to this group.

S - Agree that they should add one in FA and another in the draft. And I agree with your choices.

« Last Edit: February 10, 2019, 09:30:08 AM by dannobanano »

Offline footballdad

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 170
  • Karma: +15/-0
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2019, 10:18:31 AM »
I knew I was missing something. Thanks for pointing out Breeland and Barrett, strongly in favor of those moves as well. Gotta admit, really like Hockenson as well.

Offline Gregg

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2648
  • Karma: +19/-6
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2019, 11:38:19 AM »
I disagree with you about the linebacker slot.

IMO, that position needs some new blood.

Just compare out LB crew with the Bears.

Offline OneTwoSixFive

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2391
  • Karma: +16/-10
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2019, 03:32:28 PM »
I disagree with you about the linebacker slot.

IMO, that position needs some new blood.
Just compare out LB crew with the Bears.

I presume you are talking about ILB, but they have lots of new blood. Three picks at ILB the last three years. A 4th (J.Ryan), another 4th (Martinez), and a third (Burks) who we have very little idea about him having been a rookie and the importance of being able to diagnose plays at that position. Given the expenditure of picks here, and the serious needs elsewhere edge rusher (self evident), FS (actually need two safeties), OT (Spriggs is a bust and Bulaga is almost certainly gone when his contract ends after 2019), RG, TE, DL (especially if Daniels is gone after 2019). Heck, I'd even put RB above ILB..........and WR for that matter.

That is 8 positions I'd rate as more important to fill than ILB. Now if you get a very good ILB, I don't deny it WILL help the team, but it will also be a good pick lost at another position.
(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"

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5279
  • Karma: +43/-2
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2019, 06:59:12 PM »
I disagree with you about the linebacker slot.

IMO, that position needs some new blood.
Just compare out LB crew with the Bears.

I presume you are talking about ILB, but they have lots of new blood. Three picks at ILB the last three years. A 4th (J.Ryan), another 4th (Martinez), and a third (Burks) who we have very little idea about him having been a rookie and the importance of being able to diagnose plays at that position. Given the expenditure of picks here, and the serious needs elsewhere edge rusher (self evident), FS (actually need two safeties), OT (Spriggs is a bust and Bulaga is almost certainly gone when his contract ends after 2019), RG, TE, DL (especially if Daniels is gone after 2019). Heck, I'd even put RB above ILB..........and WR for that matter.

That is 8 positions I'd rate as more important to fill than ILB. Now if you get a very good ILB, I don't deny it WILL help the team, but it will also be a good pick lost at another position.

Either address OLB in FA, or address ILB in FA.

ILB - Jordan Hicks, CJ Mosley, Cory Littleton (RFA)
OLB - Preston Smith, Shaquil Barrett, Donta Fowler, Za'Darius Smith

There's little question. Gute needs to active and aggressive in FA this year.

Offline Hands

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1559
  • Karma: +8/-0
    • Uncover
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2019, 06:29:20 AM »
This is a good thread, needs vs. perceived needs is a great discussion piece. I like what footballdad did with adding the new guys into positions.
I suspect that some positions like TE and OLB will have draft and FA added to the list. Green Bay needs a lot and I even wonder if White is on the board they don't select him at 12. ILB isn't a pressing need, but if he brings the whole position to a higher caliber of play it will make sense. Another speculation...if the best player is a CB and is available at 30, do you take him? Sounds stupid, but I would. We have all seen what happens during the season when injuries destroy a position. Can't have enough cover guys and a very good CB is better than an average FS/SS.

We will find out soon enough...
In the land of the blind.....the one eye man is king!

Offline TAYLORBOY

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
  • Karma: +8/-0
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2019, 09:49:44 AM »
This is a good thread, needs vs. perceived needs is a great discussion piece. I like what footballdad did with adding the new guys into positions.
I suspect that some positions like TE and OLB will have draft and FA added to the list. Green Bay needs a lot and I even wonder if White is on the board they don't select him at 12. ILB isn't a pressing need, but if he brings the whole position to a higher caliber of play it will make sense. Another speculation...if the best player is a CB and is available at 30, do you take him? Sounds stupid, but I would. We have all seen what happens during the season when injuries destroy a position. Can't have enough cover guys and a very good CB is better than an average FS/SS.

We will find out soon enough...


I guess in my opinion the one element in TT's drafting was omitting certain positions...or failure to draft when available upper tier players..


I guess I'm of old school of how to build a strong defense...best defenses are always strong up the middle which includes ILB and Safety..


IMHO we have had good DL but the ILB and Safety was always filled with who we could get later in the draft...….

Last year we could have had  James at safety but traded down but did get Alexander...D James helped transform the Chargers into a vastly better D team...along the lines of former Packers Wood...Butler and Collins..


CB's can be found easier than top tier safeties IMHO...Safties  of James...Butler.. Wood...Collins play sideline to sideline....CB's usually only outside boundaries..


If you go back to Leroy Butler days we have had only ONE top tier safety...Nick Collins... and coincidently had a fine D with some UDFA CB's..we have had more top tier CB's than my memory can list since the Butler years


Then last year we passed on TJ Watt for another CB by trading down.


I put ILB in the same category as Safety ..main hub of a D but hard to find the difference makers and when they are there the Packers in past years didn't seem to view them as important additions even when Capers D was noted as blitzing the A gaps as a staple of the D......but we used some also runs at the position


White...if he is there at 12 which is a no brainer to me....teamed with CM3 would give us a tandem of ILB that would be hard to stop and turn Pettine loose with pressure up the middle...IMHO

Just my opinion


Offline OneTwoSixFive

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2391
  • Karma: +16/-10
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2019, 01:07:46 PM »
My needs = true needs. Anyone else's needs = flawed and dangerous thinking  ;D

The way I look at this is dictated by where I think the value might lie in this draft for various position groups and how that matches GB's needs.
At #12 I think it will be either an Edge guy or a DT. I'm good with either as there should be high quality at both positions there, and both fill a need, applying pass rush pressure, either through the middle or on the edge. You probably know the names there as well as I do. Picks most likely gone, like Ed Oliver, Josh Allen and Clelin Ferrell, and ones with a decent chance of being there like Gary, Wilkins, Sweat, Polite.

At #30 i think an OT is the best pick. At least one of Cody Ford, Andre Dillard, Jawaan Taylor could be there. I'm not so sold on Little, Cajuste or Risner (at #30), but they are options. Edwards  is a bit of a gamble (for me) even at #44. of course there will be value at other positions, but the OT value disappears very quickly.

At #44 I'd be looking for specific guys. Edge guy Charles Omenihu (especially if i went DT at #12) who has played a wide 9 position in college (and almost everywhere along the D line) or failing that Chase Winovich. I'd also be looking to see if FS Adderley is there, and calculating if FS Thornhill or FS Gardner-Johnson might fall to #75. If not, they are at least worth consideration at #44.

By rounds 3/4/4/5,  I should have either at least one DT/OT/Edge, or Edge/OT/FS. If I don't have the safety yet I've probably tried to move up a several spots (from#75) for one of the safeties I mentioned earlier. If I can't do THAT, I'll look for Mike Bell later on. I'm starting to look for the TE's now, Kaden Smith, Isaac Nauta or media-favourite (and mine) Jace Sternberger. If guards Deiter or Lindstrom are still there I consider them for the pick....... and I run to the podium if either is there at pick (approx) 113 (there could be a half dozen round three comps which messes with the exact order). Round four is a possible spot for DT Khalen Saunders (though I expect all the media hype means he goes a little earlier). It is also a possible spot for a slot receiver, I'm looking at Isabella in the 4th, or Penny Hart (who is tiny, but intriguing) in the 5th. RB Holyfield is attractive, if there in the 4th. Also of value here (4th round) is DT Jeffery Simmons, who seems to have just done his ACL and who will consequently fall quite a bit. If you are lucky, that later free safety I mentioned earlier, Mike Bell (Fresno) might still be here.

I'd be happy to take a flier on G Gary Patterson in the 6th, if there. I'd like to see some competition for kicker at least (maybe punter as well), whether with a late pick or a rookie FA. If we don't already have one I'd look for a kick/punt return guy.

Well, there we are, with a sort of strategy all through the draft with numerous specific players mentioned. There will be controversy over quite where players go (as there always is). My rough guide to picks is greatly helped by the latest Bleacher Report (Matt Miller's) big board on Fanspeak.

I fully admit to being influenced by what others have said after watching (for example) the big College Bowl games, the E/W Shrine and Senior Bowl, but if veteran independent evaluators (like Matt Millen, Tony Pauline, 'Pigskin' Paul and others) are excited about certain players there is a reason why. We just have to try and sort out the good enthusiasms from the occasional bad ones (like too much love from guys like Mayock, toward the likes of Tebow and Manziel).
« Last Edit: February 12, 2019, 01:35:05 PM by OneTwoSixFive »
(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"

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3529
  • Karma: +60/-17
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2019, 06:58:21 AM »
Good work 1265 as usual from you.

Agree that when they are setting their big board that positional strength and tiers come into play. But do not agree with the shopping list approach to drafting. Once the final big board is set, they are going to draft the best player available on their board regardless of position. The shopping list people completely ignored Gutes comments in the second day of the draft last year and just reasoned that they decided ahead of time to double down on CB's, but Gute made it very clear that they were not planning on drafting Jackson or another CB in the 2nd round. The 49er's traded into the spot before them in the 2nd round and took their highest rated player on their board, Jackson was the next highest rated player and they took him. They do not spend 365 days of work on players and then not draft the players that they think are the best players.


If CB Greedy Williams is the highest rated player on their board at 12 when they are on the clock and they do not have a good trade back option, they are drafting Greedy Williams. If QB Daniel Jones is on the board at 30 and he is the highest rated player on their board and they do not have a good trade back option, they are drafting Daniel Jones. Good drafting teams, unlike fans, are not held prisoner to positional need.   

Offline OneTwoSixFive

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2391
  • Karma: +16/-10
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2019, 11:57:50 AM »
Good work 1265 as usual from you.

Agree that when they are setting their big board that positional strength and tiers come into play. But do not agree with the shopping list approach to drafting. Once the final big board is set, they are going to draft the best player available on their board regardless of position.

The 'shopping list' approach is NOT the right one for GMs (I've said that elsewhere). However, when most of what fans have to go on are various big boards, mock draft generators (that are only as good as their big boards and user-needs) and the stuff out there from some of the better known independent analysts, you have to try and get a composite feel as to where you think players will go. You don't have the luxury of actually seeing who is available at that draft spot, until the draft happens, so you don't know beforehand who the best value is, and even then you don't know how the Packers board is set.

Given those restrictions it is not surprising many fans (like me) settle for a guesstimate big board, and knowing the Packers needs we try to match them with the big board as best we can...........essentially a shopping list guided by the projected big board.
(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"

Offline footballdad

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 170
  • Karma: +15/-0
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #11 on: March 06, 2019, 02:34:35 AM »
With free agency just about ready to go, where does Gute start? My number one priority would be getting Breeland back in the fold. Not sexy but needed.  That provides two starting caliber corners. Josh Jackson could be three, could transition to free safety and be a keeper - imo anyway. King can play but is either injury prone or simply not tough enough for the nfl. Even with the above, we would have (for sure) one boundry corner in BB, and one slot corner in Alexander. So.... sign BB and draft someone who could play nickel or dime and develop into something more. My favorite - Jonathan Brown from SDSU.

Edge rusher. Is a tackle destroyer truly needed? It would be nice to have a speed guy like Ford. 13 sacks and 29 qb hits last year. To put those numbers into perspective, CM3 had 3.5 and 12. Nice, but in Pettine's defense probably not required. I would look at Za'Darius Smith. 8.5 sacks, 25 qb hits, young and durable. Plays the run extremely well. Think Adalius Thomas. Would look to the draft as a supplement at edge, not a cure all. Although, if Rashan Gary is there at 12.......he is my guy.

O-Line. I would look at getting two of these guys in the draft. Lindstrom and either McGrary or Scharping. Really like Risner and Ford but would not take them at 12 and both will likely be gone by 30.

Would add more but out of time. Work calls.

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3529
  • Karma: +60/-17
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2019, 07:26:04 AM »
Personally I don't think Breeland is high priority to Gute. JMHO

This probably gives us a good idea where Gute starts in free agency,

 Verified account
 
@RobDemovsky
Follow
Follow @RobDemovsky
 
More
Several agents who have met with the Packers at the combine said they got the sense their plan is to spend on a pass rusher (or pass rushers) in free agency and then see what's left in the budget.

Offline Hands

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1559
  • Karma: +8/-0
    • Uncover
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #13 on: March 06, 2019, 07:55:14 AM »
I also think Breeland is a priority. In this draft at 12 your board will probably dictate your guy. The QBs as always will throw a wrench into the draft picks, but on the whole.....there are a lot of holes in Green Bay's team and there are a ton of quality players available at 12. Haven't been able to say that very often since the players available for the Packers are usually the same from mid-20s to early 40s.
This is a very strong draft for defense. The Pack will take advantage of it.
In the land of the blind.....the one eye man is king!

Offline mancl

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 776
  • Karma: +8/-1
Re: True needs vs perceived needs
« Reply #14 on: March 06, 2019, 08:04:07 AM »
Have to look at more than needs for this year IMHO.  Bulaga and Daniels will be free agents after 2020- neither will be back so have to factor that in draft plans

Frackerall (sp) and Martinez are free agents as well.   How much do you want to pay for each of them?

On a related note Dougherty has a column that suggests the Packers are better off getting multiple mid range pass rushers rather than paying to get a top of the line rusher.The strategy would be to keep rotating fresh rushers in there wearing out the O line.  You also lessen the chances of hurting your team if the top guy gets hurt or doesn't produce.  Makes sense to me