Possible wr trade targets?

[Pugger]

I definitely agree that the Packers overachieved last year, due to a number of factors. Health is one, a great record in one score games is another, and a high TO rate is a third. They had the scoring differential of a good, 10-11 win team, but they ended up at 13-3 for reasons stated. So they were good, but not maybe as good as their record would indicate.

Next year will be interesting, as some contradicting factors will probably collide. On the one hand, they should not expect their luck to hold that well in terms of health, one score game record, and turnovers. But on the other, the offense will be in year two of Petals' system, which has tended to yield a pretty good leap forward.

So I can imagine that the team could be better in reality in 2020, but worse in record. Say perhaps an 11-5 club, but one better equipped to make it to the Super Bowl? I can see that happening.

The last thing I want to say, however, is that while there were teams in 2019 with the same record or worse but who were clearly stronger teams overall than Green Bay (e.g. SF, NO, KC), Seattle was not one of them. If it's fair to say that GB was a luckier than normal club last year, and it is, then that goes double for Seattle. They somehow made it to 12-4 while outscoring opponents by a measly 10 points combined. Green Bay's scoring differential wasn't even all that impressive and they were still at +45.

10 out of their 11 wins were by one score. Four of those were decided by 3 points or less. Of all the double digit win teams in the league, they were the biggest sham of the bunch.

In the playoff game against Seattle it was Wilson who was the dangerous player. He can make a lot of defenses look foolish. How many of their other offensive starters were out in that game?

 

[Do7]

Many of those people also think....

• If Rodgers were traded today, the Packers would be able to free up a ton of cap space.
• The Packers will just use a draft pick to instantly find their next FHOF QB.
• Trading Rodgers, who in theirs eyes is average, will net the Packers a bunch of quality draft picks.

I know I'm gonna get flak for this, but still. But I hope this gives context in regards to when I used the word last time as I wasn't being serious.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

I enjoy listening to Stephen A. He and Shannon are hilarious.

 

[Pugger]

Still sounds like a crutch if you ask me. What team is fully healthy throughout the course of the season? While we're at it, please explain to me what guarantee would there have been for KC and Minnesota to have beaten us had those two played, both of whom were injured, and we certainly would've heard that used as an excuse had we had won. Let alone the fact that they had HFA, and had better overall talent. KC offensively anyways, and Minnesota, overall.

Lastly I love how you are completely negating the fact that our defense couldn't force a 3 and out, thus putting the offense in a bind, and how everyone outside of Adams didn't show up offensively. But somehow we lost this game because of Rodgers, even though we HAD a chance to comeback if the defense was able to force a 3 and out and they couldn't do that to save their lives. By your logic we lost this game because of Rodgers, and that is completely idiotic. EVERYONE gets blame for that game.

As for the ranked 14th? It's weird because I recall going into the season, experts were saying how The Packers had one of the toughest schedules, and yet we do better than expected and somehow our schedule is weaker. Well tell me something exactly, other than NO and us who did SF beat? Who did NO beat that was impressive? My point being is that we're in the business where the concept is winning. It doesn't HOW we win, just as long as we're able to.

So yes in hindsight, we certainly overachieved, and whether you like it or not, we WERE one game away from getting to The Superbowl, and the fact that you're suggesting we basically blow things up and rebuild is baffling to me. Matter of fact, I bet you the game would've probably been more competitive had we got the 1 seed as we have proven to be a better home team than we are on the road. Let alone on the west coast.

Yes, with all of our warts we were still ONE game away from the Super Bowl. We were operating under a new offensive scheme with only one good WR and a lumbering TE who can't break a tackle if his life depended upon it. If we can bolster our WR corps along with a full season of MLF's offense under Rodgers' belt we should be able to move the ball with more consistency along with our running game. We have to improve the middle of the defense. We can rush the passer but beyond Clark the interior of our DL is full of JAGs. ILB must be addressed too. For too long the middle of the field is wide open and offenses take advantage of it big time. If we can improve these areas 2020 could be one fun season.

 

[Dantés]

In the playoff game against Seattle it was Wilson who was the dangerous player. He can make a lot of defenses look foolish. How many of their other offensive starters were out in that game?

To my knowledge? The running backs and Will Dissly.

Of course Wilson is a dangerous player. He's a legitimate candidate for QB1, league wide.

But we aren't talking about individual players, we're talking about overall teams. And all of the data points that some might use to say that the Packers were not as good as their record in 2019 goes double for the Seahawks.

If GB was a 10-11 win team masquerading as a 13-3 outfit, then Seattle was an 8-9 win team masquerading as an 11-5 squad.

People can't consistently have it both ways.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If GB was a 10-11 win team masquerading as a 13-3 outfit, then Seattle was an 8-9 win team masquerading as an 11-5 squad.

People can't consistently have it both ways.

I'm just guessing, but you could probably go through each team, every season and depending on what glasses you are wearing, could justify how each team could have finished with a better or worse record.

At the end of the day, games are played on a field, not on paper or "what ifs and could haves" and your actual record is what it is, despite how talking heads want to interpret it. The Packers finished the regular season 13-3 and they beat a Seahawk team that finished the regular season at 11-5.

What will all that mean for 2020? Who knows.

 

[Dantés]

I'm just guessing, but you could probably go through each team, every season and depending on what glasses you are wearing, could justify how each team could have finished with a better or worse record.

At the end of the day, games are played on a field, not on paper or "what ifs and could haves" and your actual record is what it is, despite how talking heads want to interpret it. The Packers finished the regular season 13-3 and they beat a Seahawk team that finished the regular season at 11-5.

What will all that mean for 2020? Who knows.

I do believe that there are certain factors that have proven over time to be somewhat random, and that typically regress to the mean, for better or worse.

These factors are games lost to injury, record in one score games, and takeaway numbers (especially fumble recoveries).

Now just to head off a potential response, of course teams can potentially be better or worse in maintaining player health, winning close games, or taking the ball away for intentional reasons. However, it's still true that those factors are more subject to random swings than most.

So yeah, you could try to build a case for why any team should have had a better/worse record, but not all of those cases would be sound and consistent with what's proven to be true about this league.

And lastly, I do believe that scoring differential gives a good idea of what kind of team you are. +45 on the season points to a good, not great club. +10 points to basically an average one.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I posted this awhile pack in another thread, but I felt it important to state again, especially since we started to talking about YAC of the receiver group. Why did this receiving group not excel in YAC? For starters, because none of them did very well when it came to being able to break a tackle. I also want to keep this discussion just to the WR group, I don't consider including the RB's stats in the discussion is accurately telling the story about your WR group.

Here’s another unnoticed byproduct of a receiver corps that’s come from such humble draft roots. According to Pro Football Focus, the entire receiver corps forced a total of nine missed tackles. Kumerow, of all people, forced three missed tackle on his 12 catches. Adams forced two on 83 receptions, Valdes-Scantling forced two on 26 receptions (but none in the final 14 games), Lazard forced one on 35 receptions and Allison forced one on 34 receptions.

San Francisco’s Deebo Samuel and Pittsburgh’s Diontae Johnson led the league with 18 missed tackles apiece, according to PFF. Tampa Bay’s Chris Godwin forced 17, and Tennessee’s A.J. Brown and Denver’s Courtland Sutton forced 16 apiece. Individually, 18 receivers forced more than the Packers’ group combined. One of those was Randall Cobb, who forced 10.

 

[Dantés]

I posted this awhile pack in another thread, but I felt it important to state again, especially since we started to talking about YAC of the receiver group. Why did this receiving group not excel in YAC? For starters, because none of them did very well when it came to being able to break a tackle. I also want to keep this discussion just to the WR group, I don't consider including the RB's stats in the discussion is accurately telling the story about your WR group.

Here’s another unnoticed byproduct of a receiver corps that’s come from such humble draft roots. According to Pro Football Focus, the entire receiver corps forced a total of nine missed tackles. Kumerow, of all people, forced three missed tackle on his 12 catches. Adams forced two on 83 receptions, Valdes-Scantling forced two on 26 receptions (but none in the final 14 games), Lazard forced one on 35 receptions and Allison forced one on 34 receptions.

San Francisco’s Deebo Samuel and Pittsburgh’s Diontae Johnson led the league with 18 missed tackles apiece, according to PFF. Tampa Bay’s Chris Godwin forced 17, and Tennessee’s A.J. Brown and Denver’s Courtland Sutton forced 16 apiece. Individually, 18 receivers forced more than the Packers’ group combined. One of those was Randall Cobb, who forced 10.

This is illustrative of what I (and many others-- doesn't take a rocket scientist) have been saying for months-- this receiving corps lacks the skill sets needed to gain yards after the catch and make Petals affinity for the screen game work for the offense.

Really, the fact that on average our pass catching group was 5th in the NFL in average YAC per reception with this group at receiver and tight end is a testament to Rodgers giving mediocre options a chance with his ball placement, as well as Petals scheming up good opportunities. Which is funny, as some think scheme and Rodgers bear the lion's share of the blame for this particular deficiency.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Yes, with all of our warts we were still ONE game away from the Super Bowl. We were operating under a new offensive scheme with only one good WR and a lumbering TE who can't break a tackle if his life depended upon it. If we can bolster our WR corps along with a full season of MLF's offense under Rodgers' belt we should be able to move the ball with more consistency along with our running game. We have to improve the middle of the defense. We can rush the passer but beyond Clark the interior of our DL is full of JAGs. ILB must be addressed too. For too long the middle of the field is wide open and offenses take advantage of it big time. If we can improve these areas 2020 could be one fun season.

Sums it up pretty nicely.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

After seeing Denver finally win the Super Bowl with a Peyton Manning that was a shadow of himself and then going down hill quickly, and then seeing the NYG lose to us in the post season and then tanking while Eli went down hill quickly, I don't think it is unwise to plan on rebuild mode now.

It's ridiculous to suggest the Packers should be a rebuild mode after reaching the NFCCG last season. They will be early enough once Rodgers hangs up the cleats and fans will finally realize how awesome it was having two HOF quarterbacks in a row.

We had a very weak schedule and got lucky that Mahommes didn't play when we played KC and we about lost that game too. Cook being hurt against MN, etc. I don't think we had one game where we looked like a 13-3 dominating team. Go look at the season and point out where you think we were strong. Every win was ugly, and the losses were horrid. We wouldn't have beat a healthy seattle team, kansas city team, or minnesota team. I think we were more of a 10-6 team. I just don't see us going 13-3 again this year.

Do you realize that according to your list only five playoff teams had a tougher schedule than the Packers with the Texans having the hardest because their opponents combined to win a whopping six games more than the Packers???

It's extremely difficult to win in the NFL and the Packers going 13-3 is a great achievement no matter which teams they faced on the way to it. The team got lucky that they didn't have to vace Mahomes, but guess what, the Vikings lost to the Chiefs with Matt Moore starting.

Detroit about embarassed us.

The Packers won both games against the Lions.

Aaron Christ Rodgers posted a 21.9 QBR in the NFC championship. The third highest paid player in the whole NFL amongst all positions played a horrid game. He fumbled the ball 3 times, threw two interceptions, looked like Jay Cutler 2.0, and some people think we were one game away from the Super Bowl...

It's a fact that a team playing in the NFCCG is one game away from the Super Bowl.

The God QB that deserves to make $10 million more than Tom Brady eating up the salary of another offensive weapon is supposed to be so good that it doesn't matter who he throws the ball too.

For the umpteenth time, Brady's 2019 contract results in a larger cap hit than Rodgers accounted for last season.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Unfortunately I'm convinced that the Packers won't be able to improve the receiving corps enough this offseason that they will be able to overcome an injury to Adams, a free agent signed or an early round rookie. Hopefully they will be able to stay healthy at the top of the depth chart at receiver and tight end next year.



The Packers threw the ball on 58.2% of the plays last season. While they were a more balanced team with MLF running the show they weren't a run first offense by any means.



The Packers don't have enough cap space to make that work though.



Actually Aaron Jones (9.24) and Jamaal Williams (7.23) led the team in yards after catch per reception.



That's where most posters around here disagree with.

It’s amazing that GB won 13 games with that WR group, where the only real production came from Adams. Yes, yes I’ll give Lazard his due, and hope he continues to ascend, but man that was the weakest WR group in many, many years. Good thing GB had a running game last year. I imagine it accounted for quite a few of those wins.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Good thing GB had a running game last year. I imagine it accounted for quite a few of those wins.

I would give the defense a lot of the credit too. Were they great? No. However, the defense won us a lot of those games.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I would give the defense a lot of the credit too. Were they great? No. However, the defense won us a lot of those games.

No doubt. Outside of ILB, they were strong to very strong at most other positions. They need to address ILB and add a DL, but for a change, the needs list is pretty short on D.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

No doubt. Outside of ILB, they were strong to very strong at most other positions. They need to address ILB and add a DL, but for a change, the needs list is pretty short on D.

Yes and putting an offense out there that can stay on the field longer should help our defense as well. I noticed too many games where the defense seemed to be out there too long and you could see them getting totally gassed. A few times I think they actually feigned injuries, just to stop the clock and get some rest.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Yes and putting an offense out there that can stay on the field longer should help our defense as well. I noticed too many games where the defense seemed to be out there too long and you could see them getting totally gassed. A few times I think they actually feigned injuries, just to stop the clock and get some rest.

That was a problem this year, and let’s face it, if the D is on the field a lot, they’re gonna be gassed as the 2H progresses, no matter how talented they are.

I’m hoping they get a stud at ILB, and get Clark some help on the DL. If they can slow down the run, I don’t see why they can’t be a top ten unit. Ever hopeful!

 

[GleefulGary]

It's fair to say that multiple factors go into the lack of big plays after the catch for GB, but undoubtedly the biggest one by far is the personnel at receiver and TE.

For crying out loud, they were throwing screens to Allen Lazard and Jimmy Graham. What do people think is going to happen?

Touchdowns?

 

[OldSchool101]

No doubt. Outside of ILB, they were strong to very strong at most other positions. They need to address Inside LB and add a DL, but for a change, the needs list is pretty short on D.

Outside of ILB I feel like it’s Unsafe to consider Safety. Also don’t be Offended if we get Defensive Earlier than Later It’s Beginning to look like all decisions are Final, so going after the Secondary First may or not may be Premature.. at least of Late anyways. Oh! we may consider a TE, just to cover any Loose ends.

 

[Dantés]

No doubt. Outside of ILB, they were strong to very strong at most other positions. They need to address ILB and add a DL, but for a change, the needs list is pretty short on D.

Cornerback is a really big need on defense that isn't getting talked about.

Alexander and King are back as starters, King being inconsistent and injury-prone. Literally nothing beyond that is proven.

 

[GleefulGary]

Cornerback is a really big need on defense that isn't getting talked about.

Alexander and King are back as starters, King being inconsistent and injury-prone. Literally nothing beyond that is proven.

OH IT HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT, BUDDY!

 

[Do7]

OH IT HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT, BUDDY!

Oh yes. Prior to this year, just about a vast majority was ready to give up on King.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yes and putting an offense out there that can stay on the field longer should help our defense as well. I noticed too many games where the defense seemed to be out there too long and you could see them getting totally gassed. A few times I think they actually feigned injuries, just to stop the clock and get some rest.

The Packers defense was on the field for 998 snaps last season, 10th fewest in the league.

Cornerback is a really big need on defense that isn't getting talked about.

Alexander and King are back as starters, King being inconsistent and injury-prone. Literally nothing beyond that is proven.

It would be smart to bring Tramon back for another season to add depth at cornerback.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Packers defense was on the field for 998 snaps last season, 10th fewest in the league.

Do you have a breakdown of what percentage of those snaps were in the 4th Q and how that ranked in the NFL? I can remember seeing the Defense completely gassed in the 4th Q, especially when the opponent went into a hurry up offense.

Maybe our players just need to get into better shape or maybe because the Packers were involved in so many close games that had the defense out there near the end, facing a hurry up offense that made them look winded more than one time during the season.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Do you have a breakdown of what percentage of those snaps were in the 4th Q and how that ranked in the NFL? I can remember seeing the Defense completely gassed in the 4th Q, especially when the opponent went into a hurry up offense.

Here it is:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Here it is:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Thanks. Looks like the Packer Defense, in the 4th Q, were defending (on a numbers basis) against the Pass 10th most in the NFL, but on a % of snaps basis, tied for 4th behind the Pats, Saints and Tampa Bay. Which makes sense, because they often had the lead in the 4th Q.

 

[AmishMafia]

Oh yes. Prior to this year, just about a vast majority was ready to give up on King.

For games last season, king was the best player in the secondary. If he can just be more consistent, he will really e a stud. It is very tantalizing and frustrating. He is the new Finley.