Free Agency: Packers Should Green Bay Pursue?

[Dantés]

What does the WR Depth Chart ideally look like for you?

Adams outside, a quality FA acquisition at WR either in the slot or opposite Adams, a rookie from this class in the other spot, and Lazard, MVS, ESB, et al acting as depth. However, I don't see the options at WR to make this a reality, so I'd rather they just pursue Hooper, draft a WR, and roll with that.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Guessing you will find faults with all 3 of these guys and I could as well, but they also won't be commanding the money that Cooper, Green, Anderson and Sanders will be asking for.

According to reports the Bengals plan to franchise tag Green.

What I am hearing is that many of you are comfortable with:

1. Adams
2. Lazard
3. Rookie
4. MVS
5. ESB
6. ???

Will that work? It could.

I would feel better about the receiving corps entering the 2020 season compared to last year if the Packers use an early round pick on a rookie capable of immediately moving past Lazard on the depth and sign Hooper in free agency.

While a high round rookie hopefully puts us in better shape for 2021 or 2022, I don't think its an immediate fix.

Once again you completely ignore the possibility of a rookie wide receiver having an immediate impact.

They will if it is a two year knowing the situation we are in next year if it makes more sense.

The Packers championship window with Rodgers is closing fast. Gutekunst should definitely make moves this offseason that provide immediate help.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Once again you completely ignore the possibility of a rookie wide receiver having an immediate impact.

First of all, define "immediate impact". Because I have a feeling our definitions are different. When have I completely ignored that the possibility exists?

I have said the same thing over and over in most of my posts about the Packers drafting a Rookie WR:

1. It's time to invest a high pick in one.
2. Is there a possibility that said WR contributes year 1? Yes
3. Given the history of rookie WR's in GB, I wouldn't overly rely on #2.
4. Because of #3, as well as a pretty crappy current WR depth chart, it would be nice to add a mid Tier FA WR to hopefully see immediate improvement in 2020.

So no, I am not ignoring the possibility of a rookie WR having an immediate impact, but what I am saying is that if I am Gute, I am not solely relying on it. Even as a #2 or #3 WR, I would expect a rookie WR to match the #'s of any of the WR's not named Adams last season. To expect and rely on more, I think is expecting too much. Would putting up those kinds of numbers be an immediate impact? Not really, would just be another WR out there.

Just out of curiosity, who was the last rookie WR in Green Bay that had an immediate impact?

 

[Heyjoe4]

According to reports the Bengals plan to franchise tag Green.



I would feel better about the receiving corps entering the 2020 season compared to last year if the Packers use an early round pick on a rookie capable of immediately moving past Lazard on the depth and sign Hooper in free agency.



Once again you completely ignore the possibility of a rookie wide receiver having an immediate impact.



The Packers championship window with Rodgers is closing fast. Gutekunst should definitely make moves this offseason that provide immediate help.

A rookie WR can have an immediate impact, agreed. Look at Deebo Samuels with the niners, to a lesser extent DK Metcalf with the Hags. I’m sure there are others. And with a deep class of WRs, Gluten should be able to find someone for slot receiver or wideout, ideally in round 1.

Also agree with aggressively pursuing Hooper. That gives MLF time to see if Sternberger pans out. I’d like them to keep Lewis as well. That shouldn’t eat much cap space, and he’s a good in-line blocker (my opinion). Whoever they pick at WR has to be better, maybe much better, than Lazard. Yeah he showed the most promise last year of any WR not named Adams, but I’m a skeptic and need to see more.

 

[Heyjoe4]

If he's going to get paid like an elite tight end, then he should be assessed against that standard. Not saying that it's a deal breaker, but it is a weakness.

Well yeah and look at the mistake, in hindsight, of paying Graham #10 mil/year. Seems like Hooper is in the discussion. He makes more sense because he’s coming into his prime (I think he’s 26, might be wrong). At any rate, the odds are very good that the Packers will get their money’s worth from Hooper, certainly compared to Graham.

I know looking back is useless, but it still grinds me that TT let Jared Cook walk away for what I think was $3 mil. His catch in the Dallas playoff game a few years ago is, all by itself, worth the $3 mil (ok, I may be exaggerating). But Cook went on to play well for the Raiders and the Saints. OK, I feel better now. I won’t refer to Jared Cook again.....

 

[Heyjoe4]

First of all, define "immediate impact". Because I have a feeling our definitions are different. When have I completely ignored that the possibility exists?

I have said the same thing over and over in most of my posts about the Packers drafting a Rookie WR:

1. It's time to invest a high pick in one.
2. Is there a possibility that said WR contributes year 1? Yes
3. Given the history of rookie WR's in GB, I wouldn't overly rely on #2.
4. Because of #3, as well as a pretty crappy current WR depth chart, it would be nice to add a mid Tier FA WR to hopefully see immediate improvement in 2020.

So no, I am not ignoring the possibility of a rookie WR having an immediate impact, but what I am saying is that if I am Gute, I am not solely relying on it. Even as a #2 or #3 WR, I would expect a rookie WR to match the #'s of any of the WR's not named Adams last season. To expect and rely on more, I think is expecting too much. Would putting up those kinds of numbers be an immediate impact? Not really, would just be another WR out there.

Just out of curiosity, who was the last rookie WR in Green Bay that had an immediate impact?

I like your 4 point plan, which really rests on bringing in a decent WR in FA (Perriman, others). I don’t know what that would cost, but it’s a nice insurance policy if a WR drafted early doesn’t meet or exceed expectations immediately. Anyway, good summary, realistic.

 

[gopkrs]

A rookie WR can have an immediate impact, agreed. Look at Deebo Samuels with the niners, to a lesser extent DK Metcalf with the Hags. I’m sure there are others. And with a deep class of WRs, Gluten should be able to find someone for slot receiver or wideout, ideally in round 1.

Also agree with aggressively pursuing Hooper. That gives MLF time to see if Sternberger pans out. I’d like them to keep Lewis as well. That shouldn’t eat much cap space, and he’s a good in-line blocker (my opinion). Whoever they pick at WR has to be better, maybe much better, than Lazard. Yeah he showed the most promise last year of any WR not named Adams, but I’m a skeptic and need to see more.

Going after Hooper gives MLF time to see if Sternberger pans out?? I think it says that Sternberber did not pan out. That would be a big signing! Much rather go for other positions where we know we need help.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I like your 4 point plan, which really rests on bringing in a decent WR in FA (Perriman, others). I don’t know what that would cost, but it’s a nice insurance policy if a WR drafted early doesn’t meet or exceed expectations immediately. Anyway, good summary, realistic.

Thanks and obviously they won't be able to afford Hooper AND a $8M+ FA WR, unless they are willing to cut Lindsley or sacrifice somewhere else. What they could potentially do is sign Hooper and a $3-6M/year guy. Not only does this probably improve your WR group, but you aren't putting so much pressure on a rookie to immediately be the #2 or #3 guy. Hell, they signed Allison last year for $2.8M thinking he was good enough to be the #2 or #3 guy, I think they can get a better guy then Geronimo for slightly more.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Going after Hooper gives MLF time to see if Sternberger pans out?? I think it says that Sternberber did not pan out. That would be a big signing! Much rather go for other positions where we know we need help.

Well Sternberger didn’t get many chances last year, so I’m not ready to call him a bust yet. And there’s room in the TE room for Hooper, Sternberger, Lewis and Tonyan.

It sounds like your saying forget about Hooper and focus on other/bigger areas of need (correct me if that’s not what you’re suggesting).

Because ILB is so weak, and cap space limited, if it came down to being able to afford Hooper or a guy like Corey Littleton, then I’d take Littleton. There’s not cap space for both. This is a deep WR class, ILBs? Not so much. So in this scenario Gluten signs Littleton in FA and uses the first round pick on a WR. He might have room to add a veteran WR as well.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Thanks and obviously they won't be able to afford Hooper AND a $8M+ FA WR, unless they are willing to cut Lindsley or sacrifice somewhere else. What they could potentially do is sign Hooper and a $3-6M/year guy. Not only does this probably improve your WR group, but you aren't putting so much pressure on a rookie to immediately be the #2 or #3 guy. Hell, they signed Allison last year for $2.8M thinking he was good enough to be the #2 or #3 guy, I think they can get a better guy then Geronimo for slightly more.

Yeah I don’t think they have to look far for someone who can produce more than Allison. Not $8 mil year but someone who can be had for $3 to $5 mil. I don’t even know if there’s anyone out there like that. Hell, bring Cobb back on a one-year deal worth $3 or $4 mil.

To answer another question you raised, I can’t remember the last time GB drafted a WR in round 1 who became an impact player out of the gates. Maybe James Lofton, but I don’t know where he was drafted. Point is, it’s been a long time. And the elephant in the room is Rodgers getting comfortable FAST with whoever they draft. He’s picky and demanding, so I hope that person has talent, and a thick skin.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

the elephant in the room is Rodgers getting comfortable FAST with whoever they draft. He’s picky and demanding, so I hope that person has talent, and a thick skin.

I think this is a very realistic concern, it concerns me and I am a Rodgers fan. Call it an "elephant or fact", it seems to be proven with what has happened in GB since Rodgers took over. Part of #12's bread and butter is being connected/good chemistry with his receivers, when a play breaks down, they both kind of know what the other is going to do. That kind of chemistry with Rodgers seems to take several years.

 

[Do7]

And the elephant in the room is Rodgers getting comfortable FAST with whoever they draft. He’s picky and demanding, so I hope that person has talent, and a thick skin.

How is that an elephant in the room exactly? Why would a QB throw to someone that hasn't earned his trust in running the right routes or catching balls? Don't get me wrong, Rodgers has to be on point himself, but how exactly is that an elephant in the room? Trust is earned, and Rodgers will give them opportunities.

And I feel like we're putting too much stock in this WR whoever he may be. I mean Davante didn't really emerge until his late 2nd to 3rd year. That takes time. Unless whoever we draft is the second coming of Julio, Moss, Owens, Megatron like build.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I know looking back is useless, but it still grinds me that TT let Jared Cook walk away for what I think was $3 mil. His catch in the Dallas playoff game a few years ago is, all by itself, worth the $3 mil (ok, I may be exaggerating). But Cook went on to play well for the Raiders and the Saints. OK, I feel better now. I won’t refer to Jared Cook again.....

To make you feel even better, Cook was rumored to be asking for something like $7M/year and the Packers (TT) felt Bennett was an upgrade over Cook, they just guessed wrong. Cook ended up signing with the Raiders not for $3M/year, but $5.3M/year. Gute compounded the mistake by signing Graham after Bennett didn't work out.

 

[GleefulGary]

I think this is a very realistic concern, it concerns me and I am a Rodgers fan. Call it an "elephant or fact", it seems to be proven with what has happened in GB since Rodgers took over. Part of #12's bread and butter is being connected/good chemistry with his receivers, when a play breaks down, they both kind of know what the other is going to do. That kind of chemistry with Rodgers seems to take several years.

Totally. Like how it took Rodgers FOREVER before he finally trusted Lazard.

Oh...wait. That doesn't fit...

 

[Dantés]

The narrative that Rodgers takes an abnormally long time to develop rapport with receivers, or that he won't throw to good players that he doesn't know well, is total ********.

This idea has been fueled primarily by the Jeff Janis fan boys who swore up and down that we had a super star on our hands but Rodgers just didn't want to throw to him.

 

[gopkrs]

Well Sternberger didn’t get many chances last year, so I’m not ready to call him a bust yet. And there’s room in the TE room for Hooper, Sternberger, Lewis and Tonyan.

It sounds like your saying forget about Hooper and focus on other/bigger areas of need (correct me if that’s not what you’re suggesting).

Because ILB is so weak, and cap space limited, if it came down to being able to afford Hooper or a guy like Corey Littleton, then I’d take Littleton. There’s not cap space for both. This is a deep WR class, ILBs? Not so much. So in this scenario Gluten signs Littleton in FA and uses the first round pick on a WR. He might have room to add a veteran WR as well.

Yes, that is what I am saying. Big needs are: inside linebacker (not good that Burks was not on the field at the end of the year though he only had one year at linebacker in college and has been hurt. 2. Def line because a good O line beats us and they can eat up the clock while scoring. I am thinking we lose more because of defense than offense. 3. OT for the future and for next season. And then W/O. If we have the ammo; I would like any two of the four in free agency. And that would pretty much leave out TE. We have Mercedez for blocking and maybe Tonyan and Sternberger can block some also. I think Baylis has potential.

 

[Heyjoe4]

How is that an elephant in the room exactly? Why would a QB throw to someone that hasn't earned his trust in running the right routes or catching balls? Don't get me wrong, Rodgers has to be on point himself, but how exactly is that an elephant in the room? Trust is earned, and Rodgers will give them opportunities.

And I feel like we're putting too much stock in this WR whoever he may be. I mean Davante didn't really emerge until his late 2nd to 3rd year. That takes time. Unless whoever we draft is the second coming of Julio, Moss, Owens, Megatron like build.

I made that comment in the context of the question - can a rookie WR make an impact year 1? That’s tough for any rookie, maybe tougher in GB because Rodgers is very demanding (not a bad thing). You point out Adams as an example and he’s a good one. It took 3 years before that “chemistry” was in place.

So I think it would be wise for Gluten to go ahead and take a highly-regarded WR in round 1, and improve the depth of the WR group by bringing in another, veteran FA, and maybe adding a TE like Hooper from Atlanta.

The WR group didn’t concern me at the start of last season because I felt confident that MVS would improve along with Allison. Neither happened, ESB went on IR, and outside of a few good games by Lazard, the only impact receiver was Adams.

So IMO, the WR group failed. The 13 wins came about with better game planning, clock management, and a real commitment to running. The improved D also helped of course. The O is an impact player or two from making a big leap this year, and the focus will be on the WRs and TE group.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Yes, that is what I am saying. Big needs are: inside linebacker (not good that Burks was not on the field at the end of the year though he only had one year at linebacker in college and has been hurt. 2. Def line because a good O line beats us and they can eat up the clock while scoring. I am thinking we lose more because of defense than offense. 3. OT for the future and for next season. And then W/O. If we have the ammo; I would like any two of the four in free agency. And that would pretty much leave out TE. We have Mercedez for blocking and maybe Tonyan and Sternberger can block some also. I think Baylis has potential.

Yeah I was reading an article today on what it would take GB to move from #30 to #11 with the idea of drafting Simmons. Only two problems with that: 1) it would take a TON of draft capital to move up that far and 2) Simmons is likely to be gone before the 11th pick.

But I feel strongly about ILB. If Gluten had a choice between landing Hooper or Corey Littleton in FA, I’d prefer Littleton. Sadly, he doesn’t have the cap space to do both, unless he sheds a lot of contracts.

 

[gopkrs]

Yes I pretty much agree and would have agreed except about the TE. I am going to count on what we have there. Can't see trading up so far because like you said, we would be giving up a whole lot and I doubt we have a player to send to someone (but I guess that's a possibility). I could see trading up 4 or 5 spaces if the right player was there.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The narrative that Rodgers takes an abnormally long time to develop rapport with receivers, or that he won't throw to good players that he doesn't know well, is total ********.

This idea has been fueled primarily by the Jeff Janis fan boys who swore up and down that we had a super star on our hands but Rodgers just didn't want to throw to him.

I guess if you define "chemistry/rapport" correctly, I don't view it as that big of a knock on Rodgers and I think there is some truth to it. Rodgers is a QB that often times makes something out of nothing, by holding the ball longer and continuing to look down the field. That has been very successful for him during his career, especially with WR's that he had played with for quite some time. Basically, Rodgers and a WR were so used to playing together that they knew what the other would most likely do in a given situation. That situation may be something the defense does, after a broken pattern or just a quick audible out by #12. All those things take time, practice and repetition to get down between QB and WR.

I think the negative spin that some want to use to cast shadows on Rodgers is that in some way its Rodgers saying to himself "oh I just don't trust that guy yet, I'm not looking his way." Janis had to earn his opportunities and throws by being in the right place consistently, I got the impression that this was something he wasn't very good at doing, so why/how would Rodgers throw him the ball if he wasn't where he was suppose to be?

 

[Dantés]

I guess if you define "chemistry/rapport" correctly, I don't view it as that big of a knock on Rodgers and I think there is some truth to it. Rodgers is a QB that often times makes something out of nothing, by holding the ball longer and continuing to look down the field. That has been very successful for him during his career, especially with WR's that he had played with for quite some time. Basically, Rodgers and a WR were so used to playing together that they knew what the other would most likely do in a given situation. That situation may be something the defense does, after a broken pattern or just a quick audible out by #12. All those things take time, practice and repetition to get down between QB and WR.

I think the negative spin that some want to use to cast shadows on Rodgers is that in some way its Rodgers saying to himself "oh I just don't trust that guy yet, I'm not looking his way." Janis had to earn his opportunities and throws by being in the right place consistently, I got the impression that this was something he wasn't very good at doing, so why/how would Rodgers throw him the ball if he wasn't where he was suppose to be?

I am just not aware of any good NFL pass catchers that Rodgers has been unwilling to throw the ball to.

A lot of people assumed that Janis could be a really good receiver and was being suppressed by Rodgers' refusal to throw to him. But he got a chance to go elsewhere and prove what he could do without Rodgers, and the answer was literally nothing. He didn't even make the Browns roster and has been out of football since he left Green Bay.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I am just not aware of any good NFL pass catchers that Rodgers has been unwilling to throw the ball to.

Just to be clear, I am on the same page as you. I am trying to point out how people mistakenly or misguidedly use this notion that you mentioned of "Rodgers takes an abnormally long time to develop rapport with receivers, or that he won't throw to good players that he doesn't know well"

There lies the crux of the issue, having good pass catchers to throw to and what makes a good pass catcher. Some peoples definition of "good" is much different then what makes a receiver have a successful NFL career. We have seen many so called pass catchers parade through Green Bay over the years, most recently, I would pick Kumerow and one that many fans fawned over and felt was maybe the next Jordy. However, like Jeff Janis, Kumerow came out of college and barely made the NFL, didn't even see playing time in Cincinnati or New England. Sure, he shined a few times in preseason, just like Janis, but all in all there was a reason he was an UDFA, he lacked enough of the skills to make him a solid receiver in the NFL. So some fans want to say "he could be good, if Rodgers just trusted him". Really? It's now Rodgers fault that Kumerow actually isn't a solid receiver? Last season we saw a whole depth chart (below Adams) full of these guys and some seemed surprised and again wanted to blame Rodgers, for lack of production.

Once in awhile a mid to late round or UDFA makes it in the NFL, but to blame Rodgers when they don't as a Packer, I don't get it. How has #12 done with guys that came out of college as a pretty decent WR and rated well because of it?

 

[Dantés]

Just to be clear, I am on the same page as you. I am trying to point out how people mistakenly or misguidedly use this notion that you mentioned of "Rodgers takes an abnormally long time to develop rapport with receivers, or that he won't throw to good players that he doesn't know well"

There lies the crux of the issue, having good pass catchers to throw to and what makes a good pass catcher. Some peoples definition of "good" is much different then what makes a receiver have a successful NFL career. We have seen many so called pass catchers parade through Green Bay over the years, most recently, I would pick Kumerow and one that many fans fawned over and felt was maybe the next Jordy. However, like Jeff Janis, Kumerow came out of college and barely made the NFL, didn't even see playing time in Cincinnati or New England. Sure, he shined a few times in preseason, just like Janis, but all in all there was a reason he was an UDFA, he lacked enough of the skills to make him a solid receiver in the NFL. So some fans want to say "he could be good, if Rodgers just trusted him". Really? It's now Rodgers fault that Kumerow actually isn't a solid receiver? Last season we saw a whole depth chart (below Adams) full of these guys and some seemed surprised and again wanted to blame Rodgers, for lack of production.

Once in awhile a mid to late round or UDFA makes it in the NFL, but to blame Rodgers when they don't as a Packer, I don't get it. How has #12 done with guys that came out of college as a pretty decent WR and rated well because of it?

Yes, this nails it.

There is a segment of Packer fans who will default to blaming Rodgers when a connection isn't there.

 

[GleefulGary]

I think this is a very realistic concern, it concerns me and I am a Rodgers fan. Call it an "elephant or fact", it seems to be proven with what has happened in GB since Rodgers took over. Part of #12's bread and butter is being connected/good chemistry with his receivers, when a play breaks down, they both kind of know what the other is going to do. That kind of chemistry with Rodgers seems to take several years.

Just to be clear, I am on the same page as you. I am trying to point out how people mistakenly or misguidedly use this notion that you mentioned of "Rodgers takes an abnormally long time to develop rapport with receivers, or that he won't throw to good players that he doesn't know well"

There lies the crux of the issue, having good pass catchers to throw to and what makes a good pass catcher. Some peoples definition of "good" is much different then what makes a receiver have a successful NFL career. We have seen many so called pass catchers parade through Green Bay over the years, most recently, I would pick Kumerow and one that many fans fawned over and felt was maybe the next Jordy. However, like Jeff Janis, Kumerow came out of college and barely made the NFL, didn't even see playing time in Cincinnati or New England. Sure, he shined a few times in preseason, just like Janis, but all in all there was a reason he was an UDFA, he lacked enough of the skills to make him a solid receiver in the NFL. So some fans want to say "he could be good, if Rodgers just trusted him". Really? It's now Rodgers fault that Kumerow actually isn't a solid receiver? Last season we saw a whole depth chart (below Adams) full of these guys and some seemed surprised and again wanted to blame Rodgers, for lack of production.

Once in awhile a mid to late round or UDFA makes it in the NFL, but to blame Rodgers when they don't as a Packer, I don't get it. How has #12 done with guys that came out of college as a pretty decent WR and rated well because of it?

So...which one? Lol.

<3 ya!

 

[superdan]

it shouldn't matter if the player is considered a "good player." If he's on the field running routes he should be thrown to if open. That's the issue people were trying to communicate. Ignoring open receivers simply because they weren't part of the exclusive trust circle.