Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Magooch" data-source="post: 1055466" data-attributes="member: 17987">Backtracking to earlier a bit. This is admittedly a more "theoretical" discussion, but I guess for me it is not so much about having a "#1" when it comes strictly to numbers but more about having a go-to guy, if that makes sense.For instance, as above, we see this year Kelce has similar numbers to Reed. But what I mean is like...when all the chips are down and you need a guy to make ONE key play for you, would you trust Kelce or Reed more to make that play? (Maybe Kelce is not the best example *this year* as he's seemingly towards the tail-end of his career, but hopefully you get what I mean)I still really like a lot of our guys we've got. But I guess my feeling is that we just don't really have that "take over the game" type of guy yet, you know what I mean - like we're kinda short on "game-changing" talent, if you will. I love Jacobs and he's been great (and the RB position in general does seem to be gaining back more "value" recently) but I think the current state of the game still really lends towards wanting to have that kind of option in the passing game. And I am not totally convinced at this point that anyone has really shown the qualities you would want to be that "Alpha Dog" at this point. [SPOILER]Maybe Doubs? I don't know. I love the guy, but he feels like a James Jones type of guy to me - one who can go off and explode any given week, but also isn't going to be your week-in, week-out go-to guy[/SPOILER]But, all that to say, this type of guy usually comes at a steep price. When I look at the top 5 passing offenses in the league (yardage) they all have a "go-to guy" and 4/5 of them spent a 1st to get that guy. The outlier is the Lions...who have St. Brown as their lead receiver with ~1,200 yards but he is followed right behind by Jameson Williams (1,000 yards), who of course was also a 1st round pick. Now that's not to say you HAVE to spend a 1st to get that "True #1," "alpha dog," "go-to guy," whatever you want to call it, but at the end of the day your odds of "hitting" on that player do increase generally with that kind of expenditure.All that to say, I am not suggesting by any means we spend our 1st on a WR this year. That's far from our biggest need, and I'm not even sure there will be a player available when we'll be picking who would represent a good value and/or projects to be that type of ready-made go-to player. I guess my point is just that...if we really do believe we are missing that type of player, I don't think spending a mid-round pick is the best way to address that "problem" - more than likely you will end up with another guy like we already have plenty of: a perfectly suitable NFL player, a great depth player, even a high-level starter, but probably not a "true #1". Yes, there are exceptions, but it's less and less likely the further out you get. If we really feel that we need a true #1 go-to target, IMO it is going to require some significant investment, whether that comes by way of high draft capital or FA spending. Again I don't think this is something that makes much sense to prioritize in this coming draft, but if we feel it is a pressing issue I don't think it is likely to be solved by trying to invest with limited expense.</blockquote>

Verification

Members online

No members online now.

Total: 1,258 (members: 0, guests: 1,258)

Latest posts

H
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
- Latest: Heyjoe4
- 40 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
- Latest: Heyjoe4
- 44 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
- Latest: DoURant
- Yesterday at 8:17 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
P
The Crew - 2026
- Latest: Pugger
- Yesterday at 4:38 PM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
- Latest: milani
- Yesterday at 3:44 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum