Preseason 2 Washington Redskins Studs/Duds

[Candidate for Deletion]

So what you are saying is that the Packers used 3 picks on Spriggs with the full intention of him being a backup until 2020 and Bulaga's contract was up? Which would also mean that the Packers were able to resign Spriggs to a second contract.

Had Spriggs looked like a starter from the moment he came into camp or at least by the end of the preseason, I don't think the Packers are so eager to resign Bahk that they do it in September.

Again, open to interpretation of what TT and MM say and what they do.

I just think it was a terrible move from top to bottom. I think I'm merely an early adopter of the "not worth the roster spot" line of thought that will sweep Spriggs from the roster by cutdowns next year.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I just think it was a terrible move from top to bottom. I think I'm merely an early adopter of the "not worth the roster spot" line of thought that will sweep Spriggs from the roster by cutdowns next year.

I kind of get the move at draft time, but not if the Packers were fully committed to resigning Bahk when they pulled the trigger on a guy (Spriggs) that a lot of scouts were pretty high on. Isn't the first draft bust for TT or any NFL team. I'm just glad we were able to resign Bahk.

Using hindsight can make any move(s) look terrible or great. In this case it was a mix of the two. Terrible pick (so far) but great recovery by quickly resigning one of the top LT's in the game.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

I kind of get the move at draft time, but not if the Packers were fully committed to resigning Bahk when they pulled the trigger on a guy (Spriggs) that a lot of scouts were pretty high on. Isn't the first draft bust for TT or any NFL team. I'm just glad we were able to resign Bahk.

Using hindsight can make any move(s) look terrible or great. In this case it was a mix of the two. Terrible pick (so far) but great recovery by quickly resigning one of the top LT's in the game.

Im not necessarily trying to use hindsight, just looking at it with the information and perspective we have now. Using hindsight would be saying that I disliked it at the time. I was barely aware of it at the time, tbh. Given what we know now, though, and what seems to have been the course of action planned by the team, it was just a horrific move. Retaining him will likely turn out to be pointless as well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm saying this from a fan's perspective. If I were a personnel guy I am 100% keeping Spriggs for another year, possibly even through his rookie contract. No way I'm bailing. I'm not one, though, so I'm going to take advantage of the fan luxuries and say we should look at dumping the bum.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Im not necessarily trying to use hindsight, just looking at it with the information and perspective we have now. Using hindsight would be saying that I disliked it at the time. I was barely aware of it at the time, tbh. Given what we know now, though, and what seems to have been the course of action planned by the team, it was just a horrific move. Retaining him will likely turn out to be pointless as well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm saying this from a fan's perspective. If I were a personnel guy I am 100% keeping Spriggs for another year, possibly even through his rookie contract. No way I'm bailing. I'm not one, though, so I'm going to take advantage of the fan luxuries and say we should look at dumping the bum.

This is what most call hindsight

It also may have not have hit your radar had Spriggs been a rockstar in his first year, the Packers decide there is no need to resign Bahk and Spriggs is our starting LT for 2017. It would have looked like a brilliant seamless transition from one high paid guy to a talented guy on a rookie contract. Again, I don't know what TT and MM were thinking, maybe they used all those picks on Spriggs with the full intention of him being a backup for 4 years at a very important position? Maybe they wanted to move Bulaga?

I agree with you, there probably isn't a reason to give up on Spriggs and who knows, maybe his poor play is a result of something we don't know about and that can change.

I don't expect TT and MM to be 100% transparent, which is kind of how this whole discussion started.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

This is what most call hindsight

as a pure semantic aside, this would mean that any sort of examination of the past is hindsight. It has to be contextual as to whether something is hindsight or not. If I were saying "they shouldn't have made the move because X has happened since then," that is hindsight. If I say "the move was a bad move because X has happened since then," that is not hindsight.

It also may have not have hit your radar had Spriggs been a rockstar in his first year, the Packers decide there is no need to resign Bahk and Spriggs is our starting LT for 2017. It would have looked like a brilliant seamless transition from one high paid guy to a talented guy on a rookie contract.

This is doubtlessly true, but it is also supposition - pretty much a counterpart to hindsight. Still, you are totally correct in that if it had worked out we would be saying it was a brilliant move. I personally have no manner by which to objectively assess the trade and drafting, as I do not watch much college football and I do not obsess over prospects, and therefore my knowledge and context are limited at best. I also do not have a deep understanding of the process of coaching a prospect up to NFL level quality production, so I cannot objectively assess the work that has been done since. I fully recognize that it is possible it was a brilliant trade and draft, and that the coaches failed to bring him up. I also recognize that it is possible that the move was horrific and that the coaches have done the best with him that anyone could do since then. Since I have no manner for objectively assessing that -and I'd bet most of us are right there with me - I must assess it objectively on just how he stands right now, how he is trending, and what it cost us. By all of those measures, the move was terrible and he isn't worth a roster spot, and that's the best I can do.

Again, I don't know what TT and MM were thinking, maybe they used all those picks on Spriggs with the full intention of him being a backup for 4 years at a very important position? Maybe they wanted to move Bulaga?

legitimately, I'm thinking they figured that Spriggs was a pretty sure bet, and that with Bulaga's injury history and our lack of depth at the T position, having a near starting caliber guy coming up the ranks would have been invaluable. I agree with that thinking, actually.

I agree with you, there probably isn't a reason to give up on Spriggs and who knows, maybe his poor play is a result of something we don't know about and that can change.

I really hope so. I really want Spriggs to be good, and have been rooting for him every time he hits the field. I'm only talking about him as garbage because he keeps playing like it. If he shows even marginal improvement I guarantee I'll change my tone and pick up my Spriggs pom-poms. Might even get the matching skirt. Don't judge.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Would be hard to put Sprigg's inadequacies on the coaching. Campen and company have done a great job over the years coaching players up. I have to put his lack of development to this point squarely on Spriggs.

 

[rodell330]

The fact that Spriggs was taken in the 2nd round will force the staff to give him every opportunity to lose his job. Other than that? he can't run or pass block.

I said last year Allison would have a Donald Driver type career. Although he's not as fast as Driver was..I'm going to stand by that comment.

I'm still on the Janis bandwagon. He sucks at returning kickoffs, but I think he can have a impact in a game because of his size and speed. The physical tools are definitely there.

Taysom Hill can play. He may still be Raw at the QB position because I believe he's more of an athlete playing QB. But the guy can play. He's one of those guys who like tyrell Prior who could probably be just as good at another position.

 

[PackAttack12]

The fact that Spriggs was taken in the 2nd round will force the staff to give him every opportunity to lose his job. Other than that? he can't run or pass block.

I said last year Allison would have a Donald Driver type career. Although he's not as fast as Driver was..I'm going to stand by that comment.

I'm still on the Janis bandwagon. He sucks at returning kickoffs, but I think he can have a impact in a game because of his size and speed. The physical tools are definitely there.

Taysom Hill can play. He may still be Raw at the QB position because I believe he's more of an athlete playing QB. But the guy can play. He's one of those guys who like tyrell Prior who could probably be just as good at another position.

I really like Geronimo Allison. He proved to be more than capable late in the year last year. He seems to be knowledgeable with the playbook, and Rodgers seems to like him as well. With another year under his belt, I agree with Pokerbrat that he should be considered the #4 wide receiver right now on the depth chart.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

I really like Geronimo Allison. He proved to be more than capable late in the year last year. He seems to be knowledgeable with the playbook, and Rodgers seems to like him as well. With another year under his belt, I agree with Pokerbrat that he should be considered the #4 wide receiver right now on the depth chart.

ftfy

he should be considered the #4 #1 wide receiver right now forever on the depth chart.

I'm currently writing up my proposed amendment to the HOF's rules which would allow players to be inducted while they are playing. I call it the Allison Rule.

 

[easyk83]

Would be hard to put Sprigg's inadequacies on the coaching. Campen and company have done a great job over the years coaching players up. I have to put his lack of development to this point squarely on Spriggs.

He is getting beat in every conceivable way right now. Could be a mental thing.

 

[Carl]

So what you are saying is that the Packers used 3 picks on Spriggs with the full intention of him being a backup until 2020 and Bulaga's contract was up? Which would also mean that the Packers were able to resign Spriggs to a second contract.

Had Spriggs looked like a starter from the moment he came into camp or at least by the end of the preseason, I don't think the Packers are so eager to resign Bahk that they do it in September.

Again, open to interpretation of what TT and MM say and what they do.

Or they had Spriggs rated much higher than where he was drafted, saw him has incredible value, and pulled the trigger on a trade. His position as a tackle and already having two good starters might not have factored much into the decision. Might have been a best player available pick at the time.

Or they wanted to avoid the disaster of the Arizona regular season game a few years ago when the O-line was banged up and felt spending a 2nd rounder was worth it.

Without any inside info, all we can do is guess.

 

[Mondio]

So what you are saying is that the Packers used 3 picks on Spriggs with the full intention of him being a backup until 2020 and Bulaga's contract was up? Which would also mean that the Packers were able to resign Spriggs to a second contract.

Had Spriggs looked like a starter from the moment he came into camp or at least by the end of the preseason, I don't think the Packers are so eager to resign Bahk that they do it in September.

Again, open to interpretation of what TT and MM say and what they do.

still dramatic with the "used 3 picks" I see. They made a trade. We all know it. We also know it moved them up 9? spots? We also know they used in the 4th round in which they had 3 picks in it. Maybe they had figured they'd get all the value they wanted to out of that round. and a pick 5 or so away from Mr. Irrelevant at the very end of the draft.

With the support they Gave BahkT at the end of the season and in it with how he battled thru injury, I didn't even realize was that bad till he had surgery, I figured they were pretty high on him. They also have their other tackle in an aging Bulaga who has battled his own injuries and we learned that our best back up in Barclay did not come back from injury very well at all. Also consider the fact that we had 2 other Olineman coming back that had their own injury history in Linsley and Tretter, taking a highly rated offensive lineman was hardly some reach or an indictment on what they thought of BahkT. Context and circumstances are important.

This is nothing more than the Packers really liked BahkT so they locked him up and their evaluations told them they thought Spriggs was worth it, so they made a trade, moved up and picked him. If I had to put money on it, they weren't thinking anything more than that.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

still dramatic with the "used 3 picks" I see. They made a trade. We all know it. We also know it moved them up 9? spots? We also know they used in the 4th round in which they had 3 picks in it. Maybe they had figured they'd get all the value they wanted to out of that round. and a pick 5 or so away from Mr. Irrelevant at the very end of the draft.

With the support they Gave BahkT at the end of the season and in it with how he battled thru injury, I didn't even realize was that bad till he had surgery, I figured they were pretty high on him. They also have their other tackle in an aging Bulaga who has battled his own injuries and we learned that our best back up in Barclay did not come back from injury very well at all. Also consider the fact that we had 2 other Olineman coming back that had their own injury history in Linsley and Tretter, taking a highly rated offensive lineman was hardly some reach or an indictment on what they thought of BahkT. Context and circumstances are important.

This is nothing more than the Packers really liked BahkT so they locked him up and their evaluations told them they thought Spriggs was worth it, so they made a trade, moved up and picked him. If I had to put money on it, they weren't thinking anything more than that.

calls out poster for being dramatic; posts dramatic diatribe.

 

[easyk83]

There have been numerous fans over the past few years declaring Janis will break out as a receiver based on his performance during the preseason but it hasn't happened so far. I think it's smart not to put too much stock into him catching some balls in meaningless games while being covered by second and third stringers.

He did break his hand before the preseason opener last year and played with a club through most of camp, that undoubtedly slowed his development. Last year I was hoping to see him pick up 20-30 r's and say 2-3 tuddies, of course he under performed that expectation.

To me it's not so much whether or not he outjumps runs and muscles future car salesmen, it's whether he shows the looked for improvements in his game. Does he release better and more consistently, does he appear to run better routes and does he consistently catch the ball when it's thrown to him. According to JS staff he has improved in all of these phases.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

To me it's not so much whether or not he outjumps runs and muscles future car salesmen, it's whether he shows the looked for improvements in his game. Does he release better and more consistently, does he appear to run better routes and does he consistently catch the ball when it's thrown to him. According to JS staff he has improved in all of these phases.

Its an excellent point. Janis is like Spriggs for me. I don't think he is going to be any good or have a future in the league, but man would I be happy if they did. I was all aboard the Janis train for a few years, and only disappointment has led me to be bitter now. I want to like him, want him to be good. He does have great size and athletic ability, and his hands are pretty sure, but he just doesn't ever seem to put quite enough together. If he stays on the team, I'm only upset if it is just because they are clinging to what he could have been, rather than working with what he is.

 

[Mondio]

calls out poster for being dramatic; posts dramatic diatribe.

So at least one other poster can see it when it happens

 

[Carl]

Its an excellent point. Janis is like Spriggs for me. I don't think he is going to be any good or have a future in the league, but man would I be happy if they did. I was all aboard the Janis train for a few years, and only disappointment has led me to be bitter now. I want to like him, want him to be good. He does have great size and athletic ability, and his hands are pretty sure, but he just doesn't ever seem to put quite enough together. If he stays on the team, I'm only upset if it is just because they are clinging to what he could have been, rather than working with what he is.

As a guy who made the team his first two years and become a special teams stud, he has already succeeded much more than most 7th round draft picks.

 

[Candidate for Deletion]

As a guy who made the team his first two years and become a special teams stud, he has already succeeded much more than most 7th round draft picks.

"stud" may be overselling it a bit, but point taken. Of course, it also raises expectations for him further, relatively reasonably, which he has since failed to meet.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

still dramatic with the "used 3 picks" I see. They made a trade.

LOL.....How is pointing out that they used 3 picks (#57, #125 and #248) dramatic? Did they not use 3 picks to draft Spriggs? Not sure why you have a problem with a fact or why you think it's dramatic to mention it when talking about how Spriggs was acquired. I guess if you want to label the 248th pick of the draft "5 spots from Mr. Irrelevant", you might want to check your own use of drama as well. Bottom line to me, the Packers got 1 guy instead of 3 and no matter when or why that 1 guy was picked, to date he is a flop.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

So at least one other poster can see it when it happens

LOL.....yup I saw that too.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Without any inside info, all we can do is guess.

Which was my point and how this discussion got started. We don't know. Was it a luxury pick or a need pick? Personally, I think it was viewed as a need, not quite knowing what they were going to do or be able to do with Bahk and here sits a guy that was projected by some to go in round 1. But once they saw Spriggs practice and play, the Packers saw a need to get Bahk signed.

 

[Sky King]

LOL.....How is pointing out that they used 3 picks (#57, #125 and #248) dramatic? Did they not use 3 picks to draft Spriggs?...

Not exactly. They received a different 2nd round pick in return - net loss of two picks The cost to move-up nine spots were the two later round picks. They still possessed a second round pick after the transaction, just one that was theoretically better than their original pick. Time will tell if that pick will be as valuable as the price that was paid for it.

 

[PikeBadger]

Regarding Josh Jones and Burnett. I have high hopes for Brice. He covers deep well and tackles hard. He could turn out to be very good. Burnett does not cover deep well. imho

Burnett also doesn't cover well to the sideline and neither does Dix imo. That's an ongoing problem for us.

 

[gopkrs]

Burnett also doesn't cover well to the sideline and neither does Dix imo. That's an ongoing problem for us.

I think Dix can do it. Burnett I don't. HaHa and Brice might be what we are looking for. imho

 

[mradtke66]

If I say "the move was a bad move because X has happened since then," that is not hindsight.

No, that's still hindsight.

"All things considered, it didn't work out." -> Not Hindsight.

"It was a bad pick because other things happened." -> Complete and total hindsight.

It needs to examined at the time with what is known at the time. Obviously, we don't know the whole story with front offices being secretive.

To recap:

"Letting Hayward walk was a bad decision, because all of our other corners were hurt. We should have kept him." -> Hindsight.

"We shouldn't have drafted Spriggs, because we resigned Bhak." -> Hindsight.