Gary's Role

[elcid]

Don't forget that Gary was probably also drafted as an insurance for when one of the Smiths goes down. We have been extremely fortunate with injuries this season. Also our top targets were all snatched up right before we were on the clock (Devin Bush, Jonah Williams, Ed Oliver). I think they made the most of the pick, trading back and getting both Savage and AJ Brown would have been more ideal but you cant have it all.

 

[tynimiller]

Yeah I like the usage too but we will have to really hope for a bigger jump in Year 2

I think having all 3 on D at the same time with Z being moved around is ultimately what will be ideal

Which has been already happening...I mean honestly wasn't there a snap where it was those three and Fackrell along front?

I love when it is them three and Clark...reminds me of the Nascar package the Giants used to have with (Strahan, Tuck and Osi...but then later with Tuck, Osi, Kiwanuka and JPP)

 

[Sanguine camper]

Stop. Just stop.

For someone to say the Smiths (literally killing it) production is not the reason is erroneous. Also Preston's sack totals have dropped but I actually have loved not seeing him sell out as much and has been doing his job of holding the edge much better than at the beginning of the season.

Gary in his snaps/chances has done more than what I'd expect out of rookie, perhaps not as well as I'd hope or expect out of a 12 overall pick..but I mean stop.

Hey he's the 12th pick in the draft! You can't afford to bust that pick, especially given the massive dearth of talent at TE, DT and TE. I expect more of an impact from a 12th pick than what Gary has produced. If Gary was a 4th round pick I would agree with you but his production is going to be compared to other first and second round picks whom the Packers could've picked. The Packers just don't have the luxury of making a project out of the 12th pick. Given the obvious lack of talent at the TE, WR and DT position that many people were posting before the season even started, both Gute and Gary deserve the scutiny and blame for lack of production. I would as hell rather have DK Metcalf on the Packers roster than Gary.

 

[tynimiller]

Hey he's the 12th pick in the draft! You can't afford to bust that pick, especially given the massive dearth of talent at TE, DT and TE. I expect more of an impact from a 12th pick than what Gary has produced. If Gary was a 4th round pick I would agree with you but his production is going to be compared to other first and second round picks whom the Packers could've picked. The Packers just don't have the luxury of making a project out of the 12th pick. Given the obvious lack of talent at the TE, WR and DT position that many people were posting before the season even started, both Gute and Gary deserve the scutiny and blame for lack of production. I would as hell rather have DK Metcalf on the Packers roster than Gary.

With two players light years above his ability, and Fackrell who should be at or above a rookie of any degree in assignment knowledge and performance at first...you cannot declare the rookie either direction.

 

[Mondio]

They didn't bust the pick, they haven't needed him to be anything more than he's been. If he turns into another ZSmith with a season or 2 of development it's a great pick no matter how you slice it. He's been becoming more productive with his snaps, that's a good sign. The jury is still out, no matter what YOUR expectations are.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/bring...ff-347?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

. According to Pro Football Focus, from week 6 to week 10, Gary was the Packers' most improved defensive player as his overall grade jumped 27.3 points during that span

That doesn't mean a whole lot as he struggled over the first five games of the season.

Overall PFF graded him at 54.1 for the season, which is disappointing for the 12th overall pick.

you cannot declare the rookie either direction.

That's right but it's fair to question the pick based on position of need though.

They didn't bust the pick, they haven't needed him to be anything more than he's been. The jury is still out, no matter what YOUR expectations are.

Once again, while the jury is definitely still out on Gary the Packers would have desperately needed improvement at other positions on which it would have been smarter to spend the 12th overall pick.

 

[longtimefan]

That doesn't mean a whole lot as he struggled over the first five games of the season.

Overall PFF graded him at 54.1 for the season, which is disappointing for the 12th overall pick.



That's right but it's fair to question the pick based on position of need though.



Once again, while the jury is definitely still out on Gary the Packers would have desperately needed improvement at other positions on which it would have been smarter to spend the 12th overall pick.

You can dismiss the pick and not agree with it..I fully understand that position.

I mentioned no need to draft rodgers at the time either..You don't see it that way..but the situation is identical..didn't need that player as a number one draft pick. We needed help else where...They saw a huge talent and didn't want to miss...ala Rodgers

But he has shown he is playing better and a reputable site says he is improving more than any other packer.

Now...next year will be a better assessment.

But they get paid to do this and we don't.
They can screw up..but they have the resources we don't to make an informed decision..

We don't have their resources..we can make a guess on our resources..

Long story short..

Until it's proven wrong (justin Harrell) have faith

 

[RRyder]

With two players light years above his ability, and Fackrell who should be at or above a rookie of any degree in assignment knowledge and performance at first...you cannot declare the rookie either direction.

Sure. But it seems acceptable for posters to say they still like the pick based on little production. It should be equally acceptable for those that still dont like the pick to say it also based on that same little production

 

[RRyder]

They didn't bust the pick, they haven't needed him to be anything more than he's been. If he turns into another ZSmith with a season or 2 of development it's a great pick no matter how you slice it. He's been becoming more productive with his snaps, that's a good sign. The jury is still out, no matter what YOUR expectations are.

I mean this kindly but you don't get to make a definitive statement about the pick and then 3 sentences later in the very same post say people can't make definitive statements about the pick

 

[Mondio]

I mean this kindly but you don't get to make a definitive statement about the pick and then 3 sentences later in the very same post say people can't make definitive statements about the pick

I didn’t declare him a stud. The jury is out. You can’t call something what it has not shown itself to be yet.

If someone wants to call him the best #12 pick in the past decade, my entire post still stands. He hasn’t proven himself to be that either.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You can dismiss the pick and not agree with it..I fully understand that position.

I mentioned no need to draft rodgers at the time either..You don't see it that way..but the situation is identical..didn't need that player as a number one draft pick. We needed help else where...They saw a huge talent and didn't want to miss...ala Rodgers

But he has shown he is playing better and a reputable site says he is improving more than any other packer.

Until it's proven wrong (justin Harrell) have faith

I still have faith in Gary developing into an impact player but there's no doubt that this year's team could have benefitted significantly more from using the 12th pick on a different position.

I don't think mentioning Thompson's selection of Rodgers is a representative example as close to all draft picks don't work out that way no matter what.

 

[Poppa San]

no doubt that this year's team could have benefitted significantly more from using the 12th pick on a different position.

Where?
QB? Bench Rodgers?
RB? Bench Jones? I will give partial credit for sharing the load.
WR? Wouldn't have had Rodgers "trust" until late in the season similar to Lazard. Partial credit.
TE? Takes 2-3 years to develop.
OL? Would a 1st round pick have been better than what is on the field? Jenkins filled in fine while being a lesser pick.
DB? Basically swap out Savage for a higher rated player. Make much difference?
DL? We don't use more than 2 at a time it seems. Gary can play DL if desired. Another Clark would not have hurt. Maybe here.
ILB? Maybe but since Blake also calls the defense, would a rookie have replaced him? Depends how quickly the replacement could get up to speed.
OLB? Maybe someone that played the position but he'd still have to beat out the Smiths.
ST: 1st round special teams player? No such thing nowadays.

You said "benefited significantly more", not just better.

 

[longtimefan]

I still have faith in Gary developing into an impact player but there's no doubt that this year's team could have benefitted significantly more from using the 12th pick on a different position.

I don't think mentioning Thompson's selection of Rodgers is a representative example as close to all draft picks don't work out that way no matter what.

So now your a fortune teller? You know for a fact? That's what your IMPLYING

Again, it's a guess. So please stop acting like your word is end all be all..it isn't. Not one web site for stats can tell us or you what they would have done with drafted player x or z

 

[Deleted member 6794]

WR? Wouldn't have had Rodgers "trust" until late in the season similar to Lazard. Partial credit.

You said "benefited significantly more", not just better.

I'm actually thinking about wide receiver first and foremost. There would have been several prospects available who would have provided a significant upgrade over Gary this season.

I'm quite sure Rodgers would have had mo issue with trusting a rookie as talented as there were available in this year's draft.

So now your a fortune teller? You know for a fact? That's what your IMPLYING

Again, it's a guess. So please stop acting like your word is end all be all..it isn't. Not one web site for stats can tell us or you what they would have done with drafted player x or z

I'm sorry but taking a look at the numbers of Brown, McLaurin, Samuel and Metcalf there shouldn't be any doubt the Packers would have benefitted from selecting either one of them over Gary.

 

[longtimefan]

I'm actually thinking about wide receiver first and foremost. There would have been several prospects available who would have provided a significant upgrade over Gary this season.

I'm quite sure Rodgers would have had mo issue with trusting a rookie as talented as there were available in this year's draft.



I'm sorry but taking a look at the numbers of Brown, McLaurin, Samuel and Metcalf there shouldn't be any doubt the Packers would have benefitted from selecting either one of them over Gary.

Diff offenses, can't say it would be better..

Know one knows other than the shadow

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Diff offenses, can't say it would be better..

Do you honestly believe that any of the rookie receivers I mentioned who put up at least 800 receiving yards this season wouldn't have found a way to be successful being the #2 receiver with Rodgers throwing the ball???

 

[gopkrs]

Do you honestly believe that any of the rookie receivers I mentioned who put up at least 800 receiving yards this season wouldn't have found a way to be successful being the #2 receiver with Rodgers throwing the ball???

Whereas I agree with what you say here, I am not sure yet that Gary was not the correct pick nor do I agree with most posters that we have a bad receiving corps. But we are about to find out about that.

 

[longtimefan]

Do you honestly believe that any of the rookie receivers I mentioned who put up at least 800 receiving yards this season wouldn't have found a way to be successful being the #2 receiver with Rodgers throwing the ball???

On paper yes they should..that's common sense..but the way it has been going not so sure.


How many Def players left the packers and performed better? point?
Just cuz a player has success elsewhere doesn't guarantee success other places.

But yes on paper diff rookie drafted may have panned out..but again your not there and see their reasoning

I'm willing to bet they truly believed that the wr core was going to be lot better..

Matt had a lot of say in what he felt their talent was at.

If you can't see that then no need to continue.

Hindsight can skew logic

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Whereas I agree with what you say here, I am not sure yet that Gary was not the correct pick nor do I agree with most posters that we have a bad receiving corps. But we are about to find out about that.

Don't get me wrong, in the long haul Gary could end up being a great pick by Gutekunst. This season a rookie at a different position would most likely have made a bigger impact though.

How many Def players left the packers and performed better? point?
Just cuz a player has success elsewhere doesn't guarantee success other places.

Hayward and Hyde, and both had success with the Packers as well but were deemed to be expendable.

Other than that there weren't any defensive players the team let walk away who had huge success somewhere else.

I'm willing to bet they truly believed that the wr core was going to be lot better..

Matt had a lot of say in what he felt their talent was at.

If you can't see that then no need to continue.

Hindsight can skew logic

I was one of the posters expressing concerns about the receiving corps entering this season, therefore I'm not using hindsight to point it out.

It's obvious the front office and coaching staff felt different about it. Unfortunately they were the ones being wrong though.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

13 and 3 and they are wrong..

Got it.

Geez, it should have been pretty obvious I was solely talking about the talent level at wide receiver.

 

[longtimefan]

They were right about adams, I'll have to go back and see how right you were about him??

Don't be so ego driven you need to be right in everything. I'm done with this.

Every time I try to have convo with you, it's like pulling teeth for one reason or another

Ignore is a friend

 

[Deleted member 6794]

They were right about adams, I'll have to go back and see how right you were about him??

Don't be so ego driven you need to be right in everything. I'm done with this.

Every time I try to have convo with you, it's like pulling teeth for one reason or another

Ignore is a friend

There weren't any question marks about Adams entering this season but every other wide receiver on the roster though.

As a side note I don't have any issue admitting I was wrong (you can double check that as well) and would have hoped to be proven wrong on the receivers this season.

 

[Mavster]

Gary averaged 14 defensive snaps a game this season. It's tough to argue that he made much of an impact

 

[PackinMSP]

I think wondering about whom we could have selected at the 12th pick instead will drive us all crazy and it's not really a constructive way to think or thought process. What is done is done.

Obviously many wanted Oliver, Metcalf, Fant, etc. But you can't change the past so.

I think what would be more constructive is figurng what is his actual role/expectation?

Nobody wants another Justin Harrell or Datone Jones. But he hasn't been bad enough to look like either.

So it comes down to what should we expect him to do and how to contribute.

I really dislike the idea of him of just mainly "replacing" one of the Smith's if they fall off, because obviously I would like both Smiths to continue to play stellarly(sp) and have Gary come in and play stellarly as well.

I thought the most obvious need we needed besides an ILB that could cover was for someone to replace Mike Daniels. Physically, Gary is 100Xs better and more atheletic than Daniels, in my opinion.

Lowry has been solid but he isn't anything special. Kenny Clark is DEFINITELY a special player. He has made me forget all about BJ Raji actually lol

That's the reason i brought this up in the first place

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think wondering about whom we could have selected at the 12th pick instead will drive us all crazy and it's not really a constructive way to think or thought process. What is done is done.

Obviously many wanted Oliver, Metcalf, Fant, etc. But you can't change the past so.

I think what would be more constructive is figurng what is his actual role/expectation?

Nobody wants another Justin Harrell or Datone Jones. But he hasn't been bad enough to look like either.

So it comes down to what should we expect him to do and how to contribute.

I really dislike the idea of him of just mainly "replacing" one of the Smith's if they fall off, because obviously I would like both Smiths to continue to play stellarly(sp) and have Gary come in and play stellarly as well.

I thought the most obvious need we needed besides an ILB that could cover was for someone to replace Mike Daniels. Physically, Gary is 100Xs better and more atheletic than Daniels, in my opinion.

Lowry has been solid but he isn't anything special. Kenny Clark is DEFINITELY a special player. He has made me forget all about BJ Raji actually lol

That's the reason i brought this up in the first place

Gary (6-5, 277) has a completely different body type than Daniels (6-0, 310). Therefore suggesting he would be able to be the one replacing him is unrealistic.

As a side note, if we only talked about the future this forum would be an awfully quiet place.