Might as well trade Rodgers....

[GleefulGary]

Nonsense. I don’t need to have access to Gute’s draft board to know that it would have had names of players on it that would have had a more likely chance of helping this year. Furthermore I don’t need to know who they are without researching it. We are fans, not NFL GMs. That is why in general, I trust their decisions more than I would my own. That being said, there wouldn’t be much point in this forum if we didn’t question a few things. Simply saying we’d rather have a player in a position of need rather than another QB should not immediately trigger the “you must name exactly who nonsense.

I don’t agree.

If people are going to say Gute, or any GM, messes up the draft and could have easily picked up an impact players that gives GB a high percentage shot at a Super Bowl, I think it’s fair to ask who that player is.

There simply aren’t that many rookies that are going to do that for you, especially in the late first. Now, as a 2nd or 3rd year player, you bet. That’s a much more likely scenario.

And I’m not saying people shouldn’t question decisions. I do it all the time, pretty vocal about it. I’m just asking people to be specific rather than just “best available”. It’s a lazy cop out.

 

[swhitset]

I don’t agree.

If people are going to say Gute, or any GM, messes up the draft and could have easily picked up an impact players that gives GB a high percentage shot at a Super Bowl, I think it’s fair to ask who that player is.

There simply aren’t that many rookies that are going to do that for you, especially in the late first. Now, as a 2nd or 3rd year player, you bet. That’s a much more likely scenario.

And I’m not saying people shouldn’t question decisions. I do it all the time, pretty vocal about it. I’m just asking people to be specific rather than just “best available”. It’s a lazy cop out.

What I disagree with is that ... it’s not lazy not to know. I can have enough knowledge to know that drafting a Qb when you have Aaron Rodgers is not going to help a team that went 14-4 go to the Super bowl. I can also know that said team needs help at inside linebacker, and Wide receiver among a few other positions. Sure I could throw some names out there, but I don’t think it’s necessary. Now could I be wrong and there just was nobody out there that the Packers like.... sure. That doesn’t seem to be the general consensus opinion out there.... and frankly, I find it far more unlikely than the alternative. There are lots of guys drafted this year that were drafted after 30 that are currently on active rosters and contributing. Would any of them have gotten the Packers to the Super bowl this year? I don’t know and neither do you...But Jordan Love certainly isn’t going to. I’m all for trying to play the long game in most situations, but right now with Rodgers on limited time... I would have preferred a little more push this year.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

At a certain point, people still upset about the draft are going to have to accept that the Packers are good.

Every reasonable Packers fan agrees the team is good but the point that many of us have tried to make is that Gutekunst not spending the team's first four picks this year on backups would have eventually improved the roster for this season.

The best overall team doesn’t usually win the Super Bowl.

I'm quite sure the best overall team wins the Super Bowl on most occasions.

The Green Bay Packers are 7th in yards per game. 3rd in scoring per game.

And somehow, I’m supposed to believe that the offense isn’t good enough?! Is it a flawed roster? Yes! It it still good enough? Yes!

The Packers offense struggled mightily against the only good defense they have faced up to this point though.

I’m not a huge PFF fan, but they work in certain cases. So just for perspective, Chinn’s PFF rating is a 54.6. Raven Greene is a 57.9.

Ok, I get it now. You're only interested in PFF's evaluation once it fits your narrative.

If people are going to say Gute, or any GM, messes up the draft and could have easily picked up an impact players that gives GB a high percentage shot at a Super Bowl, I think it’s fair to ask who that player is.

I think it's absolutely fine to say the best wide receiver left on the Packers board would have helped more than Love this season. There's no reason to put a name out there as we don't have any idea about how they ranked the players still available.

 

[Dantés]

Every reasonable Packers fan agrees the team is good but the point that many of us have tried to make is that Gutekunst not spending the team's first four picks this year on backups would have eventually improved the roster for this season.

I'm quite sure the best overall team wins the Super Bowl on most occasions.

The Packers offense struggled mightily against the only good defense they have faced up to this point though.

Ok, I get it now. You're only interested in PFF's evaluation once it fits your narrative.

I think it's absolutely fine to say the best wide receiver left on the Packers board would have helped more than Love this season. There's no reason to put a name out there as we don't have any idea about how they ranked the players still available.

And there's no doubt, Captain, that there could have been a draft class with more immediate impact. But Gutekunst traded immediate impact for future investments. Time will tell if he was right or wrong And yes, that is reasonable. But there are plenty of unreasonable fans who argue things like:

Gutekunst is content with losing.

Gutekunst doesn't see the needs on the roster.

A rookie linebacker in the 1st would have dramatically altered the Packers' SB chances.

And that's all nonsense.

Also, the Packers put 37 points on the Saints, a good defense, on the road.

 

[Dantés]

What I disagree with is that ... it’s not lazy not to know. I can have enough knowledge to know that drafting a Qb when you have Aaron Rodgers is not going to help a team that went 14-4 go to the Super bowl. I can also know that said team needs help at inside linebacker, and Wide receiver among a few other positions. Sure I could throw some names out there, but I don’t think it’s necessary. Now could I be wrong and there just was nobody out there that the Packers like.... sure. That doesn’t seem to be the general consensus opinion out there.... and frankly, I find it far more unlikely than the alternative. There are lots of guys drafted this year that were drafted after 30 that are currently on active rosters and contributing. Would any of them have gotten the Packers to the Super bowl this year? I don’t know and neither do you...But Jordan Love certainly isn’t going to. I’m all for trying to play the long game in most situations, but right now with Rodgers on limited time... I would have preferred a little more push this year.

Again, you're failing to understand the discussion that you inserted yourself into.

The argument was that taking another player at #27 or #30 would have significantly changed the Packers Super Bowl odds in 2020-21. It was explicitly stated and has been explicitly repeated for you.

In the context of that argument, it's not unreasonable at all to ask "who" was available that would have had such a huge impact. Because as I go back and look, I see no one that fits that bill.

Everyone understands that by taking Love, the FO decided to pass on other positions of more pressing need. That is not the discussion. You either can't understand that or you don't want to.

 

[XPack]

So in your opinion, the Packers without, say, Patrick Queen have a low % chance to win a ring, but with him they would have had a high % chance? Seriously?

Patrick Queen has sucked by the way. Which is not at all a criticism of you, but rather just an illustration that rookies don't often make a huge difference.

Probably for the best. We don’t need any more hurt feelings around here.

It would have shown us trying to fix flaws. It would have shown us having more bodies in positions of need. And either would have been more useful than Love. I'd be happy to have Queen/Chinn in our team and believe that they'd add more value than Love/Dillon.

Draft and FA inclusive, Gute has done nothing that'd fix the flaws of last season. And some potential uplift x number of years down the line that may or may not materialize isn't really a excuse that's acceptable to me. Irrespective of how the picks turn out, Gute would have done the right thing to fix flaws and upgrade. 2020 Draft was a prime example of wilful negligence for me.

 

[GleefulGary]

Every reasonable Packers fan agrees the team is good but the point that many of us have tried to make is that Gutekunst not spending the team's first four picks this year on backups would have eventually improved the roster for this season.



I'm quite sure the best overall team wins the Super Bowl on most occasions.



The Packers offense struggled mightily against the only good defense they have faced up to this point though.



Ok, I get it now. You're only interested in PFF's evaluation once it fits your narrative.



I think it's absolutely fine to say the best wide receiver left on the Packers board would have helped more than Love this season. There's no reason to put a name out there as we don't have any idea about how they ranked the players still available.

I never said another player wouldn’t have had more of an immediate impact. I mean, it would be pretty hard not to have more, lol.

I’m disputing that it would have significantly increased the chances at a SB. Could you please stop intentionally misframing my arguments? I know you’re smart enough.

 

[Dantés]

It would have shown us trying to fix flaws. It would have shown us having more bodies in positions of need. And either would have been more useful than Love. I'd be happy to have Queen/Chinn in our team and believe that they'd add more value than Love/Dillon.

Draft and FA inclusive, Gute has done nothing that'd fix the flaws of last season. And some potential uplift x number of years down the line that may or may not materialize isn't really a excuse that's acceptable to me. Irrespective of how the picks turn out, Gute would have done the right thing to fix flaws and upgrade. 2020 Draft was a prime example of wilful negligence for me.

Well there's no doubt that Queen or Chinn would have offered more value this season than Love. But they also would not have dramatically altered the team's SB chances in their rookie seasons.

To be fair, Gutekunst didn't have lot of room to work with cap wise. He did sign both Kirksey and Funchess. The former has been injured and the latter opted out. So the moves he did make to address flaws on the roster, which I'm not saying were earth shattering by any stretch, have not had a chance to come to fruition.

To me, the draft thing is really simple. They decided to trade immediate returns for future ones. Time will tell if that was smart. "Willful negligence" doesn't capture it for me.

 

[PackerDNA]

I would submit that Gute went all in and win now mode in 2019, knowing that things would be tight the next couple of years. Although that doesn't explain not doubling down in this past draft.

 

[PikeBadger]

Well there's no doubt that Queen or Chinn would have offered more value this season than Love. But they also would not have dramatically altered the team's SB chances in their rookie seasons.

To be fair, Gutekunst didn't have lot of room to work with cap wise. He did sign both Kirksey and Funchess. The former has been injured and the latter opted out. So the moves he did make to address flaws on the roster, which I'm not saying were earth shattering by any stretch, have not had a chance to come to fruition.

To me, the draft thing is really simple. They decided to trade immediate returns for future ones. Time will tell if that was smart. "Willful negligence" doesn't capture it for me.

I think the Packers draft this way every year. Looking through past drafts and hearing Ted Thompson’s tidbit slips, they pretty much have drafted for the 2nd year out which makes perfect sense to me since they are almost always drafting in the back third of every round, every year. Mgmt has always counted on the 2nd and 3rd year players to be better players than the rookie class.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And there's no doubt, Captain, that there could have been a draft class with more immediate impact. But Gutekunst traded immediate impact for future investments.

In my opinion that was a terrible approach considering the team was coming off a 13-3 season, making it to the NFCCG and Rodgers' championship window closing fast.

But there are plenty of unreasonable fans who argue things like:

Gutekunst is content with losing.

Gutekunst doesn't see the needs on the roster.

A rookie linebacker in the 1st would have dramatically altered the Packers' SB chances.

And that's all nonsense.

I agree each of these statements is utter nonsense.

Also, the Packers put 37 points on the Saints, a good defense, on the road.

While the Saints defense played a terrific game against the Bucs they are hardly any better than the Packers defense in points allowed this season.

I’m disputing that it would have significantly increased the chances at a SB. Could you please stop intentionally misframing my arguments? I know you’re smart enough.

I have never mentioned anything about a rookie significantly improving the team's chances of winning a Super Bowl this season.

It seems like you're guilty of misframing my arguments as well.

I think the Packers draft this way every year. Looking through past drafts and hearing Ted Thompson’s tidbit slips, they pretty much have drafted for the 2nd year out which makes perfect sense to me since they are almost always drafting in the back third of every round, every year. Mgmt has always counted on the 2nd and 3rd year players to be better players than the rookie class.

It seems you continue to ignore the fact that the Packers have relied on rookies to play a significant amount of snaps in the past.

 

[PikeBadger]

It seems you continue to ignore the fact that the Packers have relied on rookies to play a significant amount of snaps in the past.

out of necessity due to injuries. In the past few have come in as day 1 starters. The Packers have also tended to “rest” players by being very conservative in bringing players back from injury. They tend to build depth slowly through the season imo. It sometimes seems like they are almost sacrificing early season games. This year, it is testing my patience but I fully understand these guys know a heck of a lot more than us fans. Also the rookie snap count could partially be due to the fact that we draft and keep more rookies than a lot of teams. I recently reviewed past drafts by Wolf, Sherman, Thompson and Gutekunst. Thompson and Gutekunst keep more rookies than Wolf and Sherman did. Wolf in fact, had a lot of draft whiffs that fizzled and disappeared early.

 

[GleefulGary]

[QUOTE="captainWIMM, post: 888629, member: 6794"



I have never mentioned anything about a rookie significantly improving the team's chances of winning a Super Bowl this season.

It seems like you're guilty of misframing my arguments as well.
[/QUOTE]

Captain, that’s what this whole discussion that you jumped in the middle of has been about! That’s the starting point of it! The only thing I’ve been talking about! You just jumped right into it lol.

 

[Dantés]

While the Saints defense played a terrific game against the Bucs they are hardly any better than the Packers defense in points allowed this season.

Advanced metrics have liked the Saints' defense all season much more than the traditional numbers. I replied to you the other day with some reasons why this might be. No one statistic settles things, but the way the Saints are coming on lately would seem to indicate that their poor ranking in points allowed was something of a fluke.

 

[GleefulGary]

Despite missing some players, that San Francisco defense is still pretty good.

Fred Warner for sure deserves to be talked about as possibly the best OBLB in the NFL. He’s freaking good.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

out of necessity due to injuries. In the past few have come in as day 1 starters.

Now you're just making things up. Alexander, Jackson, Savage and Jenkins were all drafted by Gutekunst to have an immediate impact.

Advanced metrics have liked the Saints' defense all season much more than the traditional numbers. I replied to you the other day with some reasons why this might be. No one statistic settles things, but the way the Saints are coming on lately would seem to indicate that their poor ranking in points allowed was something of a fluke.

I was surprised to realize the Saints defense was rated as one of the best by Football Outsiders this season when you pointed it out some days ago.

The fact remains that they allowed nearly as many points as the Packers though. Before they were able to shut down the Bucs offense they allowed at least 23 points in every other game this season.

Despite missing some players, that San Francisco defense is still pretty good.

Fred Warner for sure deserves to be talked about as possibly the best OBLB in the NFL. He’s freaking good.

Warner is definitely a great player but the Niners defense is currently missing too many pieces to be considered a good unit overall.

 

[GleefulGary]

We’ll just have to agree to disagree on the Niners. That’s a good defense that’s being limited by their offense right now.

 

[longtimefan]

We’ll just have to agree to disagree on the Niners. That’s a good defense that’s being limited by their offense right now.

Niners Def is number 10 in scoring allowed. Above average..23 a game

Pretty good to me

Tampa is 9th wth 22.6

https://www.espn.com/nfl/stats/team/_/view/defense/table/passing/sort/totalPointsPerGame/dir/asc

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Niners Def is number 10 in scoring allowed. Above average..23 a game

Pretty good to me

Tampa is 9th wth 22.6

https://www.espn.com/nfl/stats/team/_/view/defense/table/passing/sort/totalPointsPerGame/dir/asc

You need to take a closer look at those numbers though. The Niners have allowed an average of 9.3 points in three games vs. the Patriots (28th ranked offense in points scored per game), Giants (31st) and Jets (dead last).

In the other six games they have allowed an average of 29.8 points per game.

 

[longtimefan]

You need to take a closer look at those numbers though. The Niners have allowed an average of 9.3 points in three games vs. the Patriots (28th ranked offense in points scored per game), Giants (31st) and Jets (dead last).

In the other six games they have allowed an average of 29.8 points per game.

So lets sugar coat numbers.

You wont do it for mason but now its okay?

Why do i pull you off ignore?

Your back again

 

[Snoops]

I think it's been noted that it's not economically feasible to trade Rodgers right now, and with the trade deadline past, it's a moot point anyway. But I am curious as to what we could get for him if he were traded. I have a feeling it's not as much as we might think.

They would get a conditional 5th rounder for him......