Free Agency: TE's

[Pokerbrat2000]

Why do I get the sense that if we sign someone with a name and they get 60 catches and 8 TD's and average 11 yards per catch it will be deemed a success, but if RR does that, he'll still be a disappointment?

Again, Stats alone don't tell the whole story of what a player does for the rest of his team. Look at John Kuhn's stats. Richard Rodgers can put up some decent stats because of who is throwing to him in a pass friendly offense. But what does he contribute beyond the stats? Does he open up the middle of the field by forcing the defense to drop a safety down in coverage? Does he stretch the defense out by being able to get down the field fast? Can he catch the ball and get some decent yards after the catch?

 

[Mondio]

Again, Stats alone don't tell the whole story of what a player does for the rest of his team. Look at John Kuhn's stats. Richard Rodgers can put up some decent stats because who is throwing to him in a pass friendly offense. But what does he contribute beyond the stats? Does he open up the middle of the field by forcing the defense to drop a safety down in coverage? Does he stretch the defense out by being able to get down the field fast? Can he catch the ball and get some decent yards after the catch?

How many TE's in the league do that? Everyone but RR right? Safeties were dropped down all season long against us. Do you think it's more likely a WR can get deep or to find a TE that will outrun LB's and DB's and Safeties? Does a TE need to get yards after the catch like a WR? Do they need to get 14 yards per catch to be good?

One of the absolute best TE's ever to play the game, ran to the sticks, turned around and caught the ball. That was it. he shielded defenders with his body and caught the ball and went down, time after time after time. his name was Tony Gonzalez. Not good enough to be a TE? He didn't stretch any field and he had a 10 yard average. Why they try and drag RR 2 yards down the LOS and expect him to be randall Cobb with the ball afterwards is a head scratcher, but there are few other TE's in this league that would look any better.

 

[TJV]

I think we all agree the 2014 Packers offense was prolific.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

2015 made it pretty obvious to me that Aaron Rodgers alone, isn't enough of a game changer. So I guess I would answer your question with "at least 1 more then AR". As far as how much you have to pay a game changer? That depends on your ability to scout, develop, value talent and a little bit of luck. Your statement sounds as if it assumes that game changers can only be high paid players. I would disagree, there have been plenty of game changers throughout the history of the NFL that weren't making top $ (at least until their next contract).

So you're saying that Rodgers is not one of the top-10 QBs in the NFL? Because a top-10 QB is a massive game changer. Perhaps a better point would have been that an unimaginative route tree and lack of anything resembling a scheme that helps receivers get open was the problem. If we assume that's the case, then a TE would be really helpful because it means that a simplistic passing game can do better because you simply have more talent.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I would say there are at least 12 if not more, better TE's in the league then RR. But if average or adequate is what you strive for, then RR is definitely your man at #1.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

So you're saying that Rodgers is not one of the top-10 QBs in the NFL? Because a top-10 QB is a massive game changer. Perhaps a better point would have been that an unimaginative route tree and lack of anything resembling a scheme that helps receivers get open was the problem. If we assume that's the case, then a TE would be really helpful because it means that a simplistic passing game can do better because you simply have more talent.

Never said anything close to AR not being a top 10 QB, IMO he is the #1 or #2. What I did say is:

2015 made it pretty obvious to me that Aaron Rodgers alone, isn't enough of a game changer.

 

[jrock645]

What is it with people on this site perversely misconstruing people's words when they find them inconvenient?

 

[Mondio]

I would say there are at least 12 if not more, better TE's in the league then RR. But if average or adequate is what you strive for, then RR is definitely your man at #1.

JFC, here we go with participation trophies and unicorn farts again. Yeah, average and adequate is what I strive for LOL

I asked what your YOUR expectations from the TE position. What do we NEED to win from a TE? I think 60 catches, 10 yards or better catch average and approaching that 10 TD mark give or take a couple is exactly what we need and should expect.

We won a super bowl with 8 YPC and 4 TD's from the position as with our TE's, is it crucial in this offense? you think there are 12 better, probably because you looked at stats, I don't have time to watch 12 games a week, let alone focus on 12 different TE's to know they're better, but somehow, if RR puts up stats in the top 10, you'd never consider him that good would you?

If he puts up 60, 11ypc and 8 TD's, is that good enough for you? would it be good enough from someone else?

 

[Mondio]

I think we all agree the 2014 Packers offense was prolific. As I’ve posted before, Quarless and Rodgers together caught 49 passes for 548 yards and 5 TDs in that regular season. Each averaged a little more than 11 yards per catch. I still want Thompson and staff to acquire a vet TE but my point is with a legit running attack and a better WR corp, the importance of a TE is lessened. With Nelson’s return I expect the ypc numbers for the rest of the receivers will go up but I also think defenses will play the Packers differently they did in 2014. The thing that bothers me most about the TEs currently on the roster is none of them excel at either blocking or receiving – at least with regard to stretching the field.

Somebody gets my point

 

[Half Empty]

What is it with people on this site perversely misconstruing people's words when they find them inconvenient?

Need a bit more than that. Examples would be nice to enable evaluation and discuss.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

First, I'm assuming that a year ago was 2015. If so, nfl.com has him with an 8.8 average. That puts him 68th overall, but that includes a lot of players with just a handful of catches, which obviously skews the data. I'll let you choose the "with at least ___ catches" number, but Rodgers wasn't very high on the list. http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst...archive=false&conference=null&qualified=false

Without the hail mary at Detroit, which according to Nelson is all about luck, he would have averaged an abysmal 7.88 yards per catch.

Why do I get the sense that if we sign someone with a name and they get 60 catches and 8 TD's and average 11 yards per catch it will be deemed a success, but if RR does that, he'll still be a disappointment?

If Rodgers had averaged 11 yards per catch last season I´m convinced the perception about him would be different.

How many TE's in the league do that? Everyone but RR right? Safeties were dropped down all season long against us. Do you think it's more likely a WR can get deep or to find a TE that will outrun LB's and DB's and Safeties? Does a TE need to get yards after the catch like a WR? Do they need to get 14 yards per catch to be good?

One of the absolute best TE's ever to play the game, ran to the sticks, turned around and caught the ball. That was it. he shielded defenders with his body and caught the ball and went down, time after time after time. his name was Tony Gonzalez. Not good enough to be a TE? He didn't stretch any field and he had a 10 yard average. Why they try and drag RR 2 yards down the LOS and expect him to be randall Cobb with the ball afterwards is a head scratcher, but there are few other TE's in this league that would look any better.

Gonzalez averaged 11.4 yards per catch over his career and less than 10 yards in a season only once at age 34. Once again, I would be fine with Rodgers putting up that kind of numbers.

We won a super bowl with 8 YPC and 4 TD's from the position as with our TE's, is it crucial in this offense?

Now you´re making things up. The tight ends on the 2010 Packers Super Bowl winning team averaged 11.8 yards per reception.

 

[Half Empty]

Somebody gets my point

It's been a while, so what is that point, again. The last line in the post you quoted is "The thing that bothers me most about the TEs currently on the roster is none of them excel at either blocking or receiving – at least with regard to stretching the field", if any of us want a TE that gets any real notice from the opposition, he's not currently on the roster.

 

[Mondio]

and again, does this offense NEED a TE that runs like a WR to stretch the field? I say, while it's nice, we'd be much better off relying on some WR talent to do that job. is it your contention that 60, 10+YPC and 8 TD's isn't enough from a TE in this offense? the reason I have to keep making a point is because many are either unable to comprehend, or willfully trying to avoid. So put it down, now, right here for everyone to see, what YOUR expectation is from the TE, what do YOU say we NEED to be successful and then put the names.

it's not hard, some of you obviously have the answers, put them down.

If we can find Kelce, Gronk, Olsen, great, but we do not need that from a TE, and I certainly wouldn't base my offense around finding a guy like that as they aren't exactly plentiful. It's not that I don't want another TE or think it could be upgraded, but I think RR has enough to give us what we need, especially if everyone else around him is doing their job. and make no mistake, 8 TD's from a TE, gets notice from the opposition.

 

[Half Empty]

For me, falls in the same category of my wanting Super Bowls and many being able to bask in W-L records and lesser championships. Whatever floats your boat.

Do they NEED a better TE? No. Teams have won it all with marginal everything, including QB. The underlying question to many is if we wouldn't RATHER have an additional weapon, which we would. WRs stretching the field is fine, but they're expected to do so and are planned for (i.e., covered by DBs). TEs that can bowl over a DB and run beyond a LB are calls "mismatch" for a good reason.

 

[Mondio]

yeah, we got it, I love unicorn farts and participation trophies, you're funny. I don't even know what it means to compete as an individual or with a team, and as such have never achieved anything in sports like a state runner up or championship at a collegiate level. I've certainly never achieved anything outside of sports. It's why i'm at home with our son right now, rather than at work. It's certainly not because I choose to be and am able to, it's just because I've never done anything in life worth mentioning. I couldn't achieve success if it was handed to me. It's obvious I hate Superbowls and it is my dream every year to watch the packers fail to win one. i'm sure It's Ted's, Aaaron's, MM's and RR's too.
Now that we have that out of the way, one more time for those that misunderstood the first time or two or three or four....and the really slow kid in the back...

What are the numbers that are acceptable from a TE to be worthy of NFL status, and who. Tell us YOUR answer to the Packers needs at TE. We obviously don't have one according to you.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

and again, does this offense NEED a TE that runs like a WR to stretch the field? I say, while it's nice, we'd be much better off relying on some WR talent to do that job. is it your contention that 60, 10+YPC and 8 TD's isn't enough from a TE in this offense? the reason I have to keep making a point is because many are either unable to comprehend, or willfully trying to avoid. So put it down, now, right here for everyone to see, what YOUR expectation is from the TE, what do YOU say we NEED to be successful and then put the names.

it's not hard, some of you obviously have the answers, put them down.

Once again, the Packers don't imperatively need to upgrade the tight end position to be considered a Super Bowl contender but adding an athletic player would improve the team's chances.

I'm absolutely fine with our starting TE having 60 receptions and 8 TDs but an average of 7.88 yards per reception (not including the hail mary) is unacceptable.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Now that we have that out of the way, one more time for those that misunderstood the first time or two or three or four....and the really slow kid in the back...

What are the numbers that are acceptable from a TE to be worthy of NFL status, and who. Tell us YOUR answer to the Packers needs at TE. We obviously don't have one according to you.

If you just Google "Packers in need of TE" you will find plenty of good articles that may explain this better to you then I have been able to. I have included one below. I am actually kind of tired of the back and forth with you over it, so call me the slow kid on the block, but I agree to disagree with you when it comes to the Packers need for an upgrade at the position.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/pack...-help-at-tight-end-b99664370z1-367767831.html

 

[Mondio]

so you think owen daniels would have been an upgrade for the Packers at the position? why? because have Aaron Rodgers? and his numbers would just automatically be better? we ranked a few spots higher than the Broncos in offense, ran the same number of plays, for a lower per play average, had 400 less passing yards, but more passing TD's. Seems they were able to sling the ball around more than us, despite having a 1 winged QB, so it's not as if the pass catchers did not have opportunity. Despite being on a team that slung it around more than we did he did less and scored less. He had a YPC that I expect RR will have too, assuming everyone else is doing their job. It's not as if Daniels was a guy anybody schemed for either.

sure we could use a better TE, would have used better QB play, better RB play, better WR play, better Olineplay. of that list, I put RR's at the end. His 8.whatever ypc isn't good, but i do not think it will stay there. I'd be very surprised if he's not at 10+ closer to 11+ next year with the catches and TD's i've said a hundred times on this thread. and we can complain about his low YPC, but then if we'd take out all the patterns within 2 yds of the LOS they seem to throw at him, that clearly doesn't fit his skill set, it would be better already too.

 

[Half Empty]

Sorry, I lost that last part somewhere in the previous rants. If you're asking me what I'd like to see in a TE, I needn't stray far from home - http://www.nfl.com/player/jermichaelfinley/1072/profile

 

[Sunshinepacker]

What is it with people on this site perversely misconstruing people's words when they find them inconvenient?

I didn't misconstrue anything. He stated Rodgers isn't enough to make a difference. I pointed out that great QBs are enough to make a difference by themselves. Please, what did I misconstrue?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Never said anything close to AR not being a top 10 QB, IMO he is the #1 or #2. What I did say is:

2015 made it pretty obvious to me that Aaron Rodgers alone, isn't enough of a game changer.

Exactly. And I said that a great QB is a game changer by themselves.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I didn't misconstrue anything. He stated Rodgers isn't enough to make a difference. I pointed out that great QBs are enough to make a difference by themselves. Please, what did I misconstrue?

Actually.....you did misconstrue what I said....again...... You really need to read what I wrote and not interpret for me....thank you.

What I did say:

2015 made it pretty obvious to me that Aaron Rodgers alone, isn't enough of a game changer.

Talk to Drew Brees or many of the top QB's in the history of the NFL, that alone, couldn't carry their team.... if you still don't understand my statement.

So you're saying that Rodgers is not one of the top-10 QBs in the NFL?

Where did I say this? I'm still searching.

 

[TJV]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/pack...ons-in-free-agency-b99683212z1-371480391.html

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

zeroes in on Ted Thompson territory with the line, “There are a few lesser-known tight ends the Packers could zero in on.”

I think you and Silverstein hit it on the head in regards to the Packers and a FA TE. After seeing what the Colts paid Allen I just don't see TT going after the top $ FA TE's. I know all of us want to see an upgrade from Richard Rodgers when it comes to speed and blocking, but I personally don't expect to see it in a big FA signing. If this is the case, I hope to see a mid round pick on a future TE that has a good shot at filling that need down the road.

 

[Ace]

Cross Ladarius Green off the list. Schefter reporting he's going to sign with the Steelers.