Blake Martinez

[OldSchool101]

So, suddenly Blake Martinez looks like a possibility to fill a hole on defense, if we see long term injuries from two of our ILBs?

Whether or not it happens doesn't matter, what does matter is that the idea doesn't look so dumb anymore, does it?

Always keep an open mind on what has to be done when unexpected things happen. Contemplating it in advance is always a wise decision.

Precisely, we should always be following our options and have a backup strategy. I don't know where we are at iLB, but I do know Blake would probably be an adequate and immediate fit if we were banged up. Now he's one of a half dozen guys who could be a contingency and I hope we don't need him.
I'm really more concerned about Edge as we didn't generate much pressure on Cousins at all from the perimeter and that is not a winning strategy. I would have like to see us bring Safety or LB pressure an attack downhill more, versus waiting for the play to come to us. We took one right out of the 2016 Blake playbook yesterday

 

[GreenNGold_81]

I think it would be cool to get Blake back. He'd be playing in a new defense though, so maybe his errors are corrected with new coaching.

 

[Heyjoe4]

So, suddenly Blake Martinez looks like a possibility to fill a hole on defense, if we see long term injuries from two of our ILBs?

Whether or not it happens doesn't matter, what does matter is that the idea doesn't look so dumb anymore, does it?

Always keep an open mind on what has to be done when unexpected things happen. Contemplating it in advance is always a wise decision.

The Giants cut him two weeks ago I think. I don't think anyone has picked him up. Probably tells us all we need to know.

With all the improvements to the D, it would feel like such a huge step backwards to bring him back. If they need a body they need a body. I would hope they can do better.

 

[OldSchool101]

The Giants cut him two weeks ago I think. I don't think anyone has picked him up. Probably tells us all we need to know.

With all the improvements to the D, it would feel like such a huge step backwards to bring him back. If they need a body they need a body. I would hope they can do better.

I'd want to get a better look at McDuffie as he looked like he took a leap from nobody to somebody early this year. They can elevate Wilborn until Walker is back. This is the perfect time to see what we have in our 2nd year LB McDuffie

It appears we dodged a bullet. Barnes should be back with plenty of time left in the season

Injury Update: Packers LB Krys Barnes

While the 23-7 loss to the Vikings was bad, what was even worse was the slew of injuries that the Packers sustained. One position that got hit especially Early this afternoon we got an injury update on Packers linebacker Krys Barnes.

wisportsheroics.com

 

[GreenNGold_81]

Barnes injury is a high ankle. That's usually 6 weeks or longer sometimes to see the field, but longer to cut with comfort. I think they should be looking at adding a player because even with Barnes back, it may be 10 weeks before he's the player he was yesterday before the injury if not longer.

 

[tynimiller]

Barnes injury is a high ankle. That's usually 6 weeks or longer sometimes to see the field, but longer to cut with comfort. I think they should be looking at adding a player because even with Barnes back, it may be 10 weeks before he's the player he was yesterday before the injury if not longer.

Yup, 100% believe we need to sign a vet even if they end up not passing McDuffie....no word on Walker yet is there?

 

[Heyjoe4]

Barnes injury is a high ankle. That's usually 6 weeks or longer sometimes to see the field, but longer to cut with comfort. I think they should be looking at adding a player because even with Barnes back, it may be 10 weeks before he's the player he was yesterday before the injury if not longer.

Ankle injuries can be complicated - especially so-called "high ankle" issues or sprains. They do take time to heal, and more time to heal enough to allow full-speed play. So yeah, they need another ILB. I don't know what happened to Walker either but he went out in the 2H.

 

[mradtke66]

The Giants cut him two weeks ago I think. I don't think anyone has picked him up. Probably tells us all we need to know.

Or teams are waiting to use him as an injury replacement post week 1. Were he signed week 1, his base salary becomes guaranteed because he is a vested veteran. If we are indeed short a body for 6-8 games, sign him, cut him when the depth is healthy, and the cap hit is lessened.

With all the improvements to the D, it would feel like such a huge step backwards to bring him back. If they need a body they need a body. I would hope they can do better.

I'm no Martinez fan and presumed his departure would happen more or less exactly how it happened. If we are in a spot where we need to replace a starter and a primary backup, a smart vet is not a bad pickup. Sometimes the best option is just the least-worst option.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Or teams are waiting to use him as an injury replacement post week 1. Were he signed week 1, his base salary becomes guaranteed because he is a vested veteran. If we are indeed short a body for 6-8 games, sign him, cut him when the depth is healthy, and the cap hit is lessened.



I'm no Martinez fan and presumed his departure would happen more or less exactly how it happened. If we are in a spot where we need to replace a starter and a primary backup, a smart vet is not a bad pickup. Sometimes the best option is just the least-worst option.

Yeah that's well put and a good way to look at this. I'm just trying to absorb that ***-kicking from yesterday and the fact that two of the three best ILBs went down isn't comforting! Thanks for the info on salaries for vested veterans. I didn't know that.

 

[Mondio]

Yeah that's well put and a good way to look at this. I'm just trying to absorb that ***-kicking from yesterday and the fact that two of the three best ILBs went down isn't comforting! Thanks for the info on salaries for vested veterans. I didn't know that.

well you should have, I told you that earlier in this thread I think

 

[Heyjoe4]

well you should have, I told you that earlier in this thread I think

I think you did too Mondio. What can I say? I'm old and have no short-term memory!

 

[Mondio]

I think you did too Mondio. What can I say? I'm old and have no short-term memory!

hey, i'm surprised I remembered I told you LOL

 

[Heyjoe4]

hey, i'm surprised I remembered I told you LOL

Yes you did and thanks again!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

However we are a relatively young team and it's not IF but WHEN will they start to click.

Actually the Packers' roster is in the middle of the pack in average age.

Christian showed me what I already knew, he's blazing fast and against average speed Secondaries he'll need to be doubled. Keep feeing him the ball and get his confidence going because he is a legitimate deep threat.

Watson needs to catch the ball to be considered a legitimate deep threat.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Actually the Packers' roster is in the middle of the pack in average age.



Watson needs to catch the ball to be considered a legitimate deep threat.

Yeah and first Rodgers needs to want to throw him the ball. After that huge drop, Watson wasn't targeted until late in the 4th quarter. Rodgers simply won't throw to guys who can't hang on.

Well, that's what happens when you take a receiver from North Dakota State - and ignore the WR/TE positions for years. No need to double a guy who can't catch the ball. He's not a threat until he proves otherwise and he's running out of chances.

 

[Pkrjones]

No need to double a guy who can't catch the ball. He's not a threat until he proves otherwise and he's running out of chances.

What?!? You think AR has blackballed him & won't throw to him again due to one drop? I'd be surprised if we don't see at least one deep pass to him every game, and I'd also be surprised if Watson drops another in next 6 games. Watson knows that was a gift-wrapped TD that he blew, and it won't happen very often if at all, anymore.

 

[tynimiller]

What?!? You think AR has blackballed him & won't throw to him again due to one drop? I'd be surprised if we don't see at least one deep pass to him every game, and I'd also be surprised if Watson drops another in next 6 games. Watson knows that was a gift-wrapped TD that he blew, and it won't happen very often if at all, anymore.

He was targeted three more times that same game following that drop. One of those three targets was not complete but wasn't a drop. The fact we (Aaron) went back to him shows faith is there. Rodgers is definitely the type to write a guy off, but not this early and not for a rookie IMO.

 

[OldSchool101]

Watson needs to catch the ball to be considered a legitimate deep threat.

I agree, in this moment anyway
That said, if #9 keeps running by Safeties by 3+ yards 40 yards downfield? it’s a matter of time before he burns someone for a 50+ gain or quick points. Just a few big plays and he’ll have to be accounted for regularly as a deep threat.

In medium terms, If opponents are expecting #9 to drop the ball most or all of the time, they are going to be thoroughly disappointed in the outcome if he’s disregarded.

 

[tynimiller]

I agree, in this moment anyway
That said, if #9 keeps running by Safeties by 3+ yards 40 yards downfield? it’s a matter of time before he burns someone for a 50+ gain or quick points. Just a few big plays and he’ll have to be accounted for regularly as a deep threat.

In medium terms, If opponents are expecting #9 to drop the ball most or all of the time, they are going to be thoroughly disappointed in the outcome if he’s disregarded.

However, as I've broken down historical wide receivers that were "deep threats" do not expect his completion percentage to flirt with 70% but be in the 50%s which is more normal of guys that are "true deep threat targets". So he will suffer from more drops or incompletions than many if that is how we utilize him (similar to MVS style).

 

[OldSchool101]

However, as I've broken down historical wide receivers that were "deep threats" do not expect his completion percentage to flirt with 70% but be in the 50%s which is more normal of guys that are "true deep threat targets". So he will suffer from more drops or incompletions than many if that is how we utilize him (similar to MVS style).

Yeah I read so where he was like 57% in college. But that’s still pretty good with a 20+ average catch.

He had one season with a 65% catch rate in college. So while starting with a drop isn’t good, he’s really a 57% area guy.

 

[tynimiller]

Yeah I read so where he was like 57% in college. But that’s still pretty good with a 20+ average catch.

He had one season with a 65% catch rate in college. So while starting with a drop isn’t good, he’s really a 57% area guy.

Which if he averages north of 13/14 yards per reception that's about middle to slightly above expected for a deep threat type guy. He breaks 60 that's freaking awesome.

 

[Heyjoe4]

What?!? You think AR has blackballed him & won't throw to him again due to one drop? I'd be surprised if we don't see at least one deep pass to him every game, and I'd also be surprised if Watson drops another in next 6 games. Watson knows that was a gift-wrapped TD that he blew, and it won't happen very often if at all, anymore.

No sorry, I was commenting on coverage. Watson is not a threat until he proves it. But Rodgers did t throw another pass his way until late Q4. I hope you’re right and he starts holding on. This reminds me of how MVS started.

Rodgers won’t blackball anyone. But two targets in one game is a bad start. Watson has to work on catching. I think he’ll be fine.

Yeah I read so where he was like 57% in college. But that’s still pretty good with a 20+ average catch.

He had one season with a 65% catch rate in college. So while starting with a drop isn’t good, he’s really a 57% area guy.

So he drops 40% of his targets? I think it means 40% of his targets are incomplete. Maybe I’m wrong, but dropping 40% of passes doesn’t sound good.

I’m more interested in his catch/drop ratio. Passes he should have caught but didn’t. Again, I don’t think it’s 40%. Can you clarify that? Thanks.

 

[OldSchool101]

No sorry, I was commenting on coverage. Watson is not a threat until he proves it. But Rodgers did t throw another pass his way until late Q4. I hope you’re right and he starts holding on. This reminds me of how MVS started.

Rodgers won’t blackball anyone. But two targets in one game is a bad start. Watson has to work on catching. I think he’ll be fine.

So he drops 40% of his targets? I think it means 40% of his targets are incomplete. Maybe I’m wrong, but dropping 40% of passes doesn’t sound good.

I’m more interested in his catch/drop ratio. Passes he should have caught but didn’t. Again, I don’t think it’s 40%. Can you clarify that? Thanks.

No we were speaking to his overall catch rate because he’s targeted substantially more down the field. Although he did have a college season at 65% but his college opportunities were relatively limited, so that’s why I think catch % jumps around so drastic.

Anyone that gets 3+ yards past your deepest Defender and is the fastest player on the field and is running away should be considered a threat for a DC. Unless it’s a squirrel on the field, that’s a problem and MN dodged a lethal bullet and I bet they would agree with me.

 

[Half Empty]

Didn't realize they'd brought back Blake Martinez as a receiver.

 

[OldSchool101]

Didn't realize they'd brought back Blake Martinez as a receiver.

We were referencing all the plays given up past 5+ yards down the field and thus Blake could've fit so please acquit. I apologize your Honor, but I was trying to be nice to Joe by going along with the line of questioning and build up his short-term memories