It’s now OFFICIAL!!! Rodgers has been traded to the Jets.

[mradtke66]

That is a slip of semantics there IMO...Watkins was no rookie to the league

I specifically said receiver though, not pass catcher. The role of each player group is different and what they do to the offense is different.

Re: Watkins, you’re right. The rookies were better. He was routinely ******** up routes.

The context here is “the offense was simplified because we had new players to the scheme.”

The difference between Kansas City is they still had scary pass catchers of any kind. They could punish you if you over-sold on something. And the new players for KC were role players, even if they played their roles well (looking at you MVS).

The Packers did not have a scary/dynamic receiver until Watson returned from injury.

 

[tynimiller]

I specifically said receiver though, not pass catcher. The role of each player group is different and what they do to the offense is different.

Re: Watkins, you’re right. The rookies were better. He was routinely ******** up routes.

The context here is “the offense was simplified because we had new players to the scheme.”

The difference between Kansas City is they still had scary pass catchers of any kind. They could punish you if you over-sold on something. And the new players for KC were role players, even if they played their roles well (looking at you MVS).

The Packers did not have a scary/dynamic receiver until Watson returned from injury.

However, I played the "receiver only" game with KC as an example. Sure they had a much more dynamic TE, but we easily had a vastly more dynamic and better RB threat receiving options.

So only KC has five of their six WRs merely doing a role in their offense which is new to them? I'm confused...JuJu was his first year, Skyy Moore first year, MVS first year, Justin Watson first year, Kadarius Toney first year (not even a full year)....Mecole Hardman was the ONLY KC system guy with any KC experience in the WR room.

 

[mradtke66]

However, I played the "receiver only" game with KC as an example. Sure they had a much more dynamic TE, but we easily had a vastly more dynamic and better RB threat receiving options.

So only KC has five of their six WRs merely doing a role in their offense which is new to them? I'm confused...JuJu was his first year, Skyy Moore first year, MVS first year, Justin Watson first year, Kadarius Toney first year (not even a full year)....Mecole Hardman was the ONLY KC system guy with any KC experience in the WR room.

It's a fine line to be sure and the whole thread is hitting two topics.

Topic 1: I assert, and I think Cap agrees with me, that the Packer simplified the offense, at least as far as the WRs go, because we had three rookies and new player (Watkins.) I do not know what, if any, changes KC made to bring their 5 new players up to speed. Maybe they limited the packages/formations/routes of each receiver? Maybe condensed the entire playbook? Maybe they have better coaches? Maybe a simpler offense? I don't know, I'm just speculating.

Topic 2: Talent and Experience relative to production in the scheme. The Packer primary pass catchers, WR and TE, were not scary until Waston returned from injury. Opposing defenses could control/contain/shutdown the group too easily, allowing them over-emphasize defending the run. Yes, Jones is an excellent receiving running back, but without a healthy Watson, he's kind of the only weapon. Key on him, run or pass, and the offense sputters.

The Chiefs were protected against this because of Kelce (he all but demands a safety over the top) and to a lesser extent, MVS. MVS' route tree got better, but even if all he can do is run a Go and catch 1/2 of the Go's thrown to him, that can be enough to break a defense. The other WRs just need to do "just enough" and the offense will flourish. Case in point: he went off 6/8 for about 120 yards in the AFC championship game, 0/1 in the Super Bowl.

 

[OldSchool101]

This article mentions biltmore

Im at an air b n b 2 mins away and went for a walk there Sunday

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

Love me some Asheville. Especially like the old wooden bowling alley they had in the basement area. I would’ve been swimming and bowling daily. Either that or the families indentured servant one or the other.

 

[OldSchool101]

That is a slip of semantics there IMO...Watkins was no rookie to the league and I don't think should just be slipped in with the rookies in the same manner...nor does it acknowledge that targets don't solely go to WRs. Our targets by players:

Lazard - 100
Jones - 72
Doubs - 67
Tonyan - 67
Watson - 66
Cobb - 50
Dillon - 43
Watkins - 22
Deguara - 15
Toure - 10
Amari Rodgers - 8
Lewis - 7
Davis - 7
Winfree - 4
Taylor - 1
Bakh - 1

Only three rookies are on that list or guys that would have been in their first

Let's look at the Chiefs last year.....2 of their top 3 targeted players were first year on that team guys...4 of their top 8 most targeted first year guys...5 of their 6 WRs targeted the whole season were first year guys with that team.




.

I like it good Info

As a sidenote and just more info (not necessarily direct to your post)
of our top 10 targets in 2022, we’ve retained a little over half of the same players/production (51.4%)
That said, I’d expect Doubs, Watson, Aaron Jones and AJ Dillon to get the Lions share of increase for returning players.
As far as new potential in 2023 in speaking to your point. We have 4 player additions (with a Receiving capacity) that were drafted in the 5th Round or earlier.
We have 3 players inside the top #78
2 players inside the top #50 overall

We do absolutely have a big receptions void to fill. We’ve got some big time athletes that should be hungry in getting their share of the pie that’s “up for grabs”(literally!)

Looking across the spectrum of players who can rise, I’ll be surprised if Watson doesn’t get his first 1,000 yard season. We already know he’s legit

 

[JPPT1974]

He, Dillion, and Hackett reunited and feels so good. As really now it is officially Jordan Love's team to lose.

 

[tynimiller]

Looking across the spectrum of players who can rise, I’ll be surprised if Watson doesn’t get his first 1,000 yard season. We already know he’s legit

Depends on your definition of legit, I personally cannot say I have say elite WR1 level type locked in on Watson - still just one year. I do strongly believe that someone in our WR room between Watons/Doubs/Reed/Wicks/Dubose one of them for sure is gonna become a true legit wide WR1...and then if the collections of the rest and Toure/Melton can provide a WR2 and WR3 type I love the projection of the room.

 

[OldSchool101]

Depends on your definition of legit, I personally cannot say I have say elite WR1 level type locked in on Watson - still just one year. I do strongly believe that someone in our WR room between Watons/Doubs/Reed/Wicks/Dubose one of them for sure is gonna become a true legit wide WR1...and then if the collections of the rest and Toure/Melton can provide a WR2 and WR3 type I love the projection of the room.

Sure. When I said legit I meant more NFL ready. Some in here expressed that Watson couldn’t play at this level because he came from an FCS program. We now know that was incorrect.

Also I backed my post up by saying Watson should break 1,000 yards. Having a good chance of clipping 1,000 yards isn’t an elite WR1 imo. Plus, I never said Elite. Elite for me is well beyond 1,000 yards. When I think of elite I think of Kupp, Hopkins, Adams, Jefferson types.

 

[tynimiller]

Sure. When I said legit I meant more NFL ready. Many thought he couldn’t play at this level because he came from an FCS program. We now know that was incorrect.

Also I said he could have a chance of breaking 1,000 yards. 1,000 yards isn’t elite.

Oh I get it, I said it depends on what legit means to each person, which is why I expounded I cannot christen him a legit WR1 type - which honestly is someone likely hitting 1250 or more yards a season at this point.

 

[OldSchool101]

Oh I get it, I said it depends on what legit means to each person, which is why I expounded I cannot christen him a legit WR1 type - which honestly is someone likely hitting 1250 or more yards a season at this point.

Yeah. He’s probably a WR1 for us (leading Packer WR) but compared to the league he’s still just a WR2 if that makes any sense. He’s got a lot of football ahead of him though.

 

[tynimiller]

Yeah. He’s probably a WR1 for us (leading Packer WR) but compared to the league he’s still just a WR2 if that makes any sense. He’s got a lot of football ahead of him though.

I just cannot christen a rookie after one year anything personally is all. I actually think longevity and position and body type he, Doubs and Wicks all scream potentially growing into legit NFL caliber starting WRs with a WR2 floor IMO.

 

[OldSchool101]

I just cannot christen a rookie after one year anything personally is all. I actually think longevity and position and body type he, Doubs and Wicks all scream potentially growing into legit NFL caliber starting WRs with a WR2 floor IMO.

These guys are all Green peas in comparison to other teams Rosters

That said I think we’re in for a treat. I also think it’s very possible we draft another upper echelon Wideout next season. Call me crazy I know (partly because we’ve likely got 3 top #50 stabs again)

 

[milani]

Only because i assume good coaching. I can’t imagine a competent coach throwing a complex offense into a rookie’s lap (especially a rookie like Watson who was known to be extremely raw coming out of college).

Exactly. You simplify. As players improve and mature they can grasp more.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That is a slip of semantics there IMO...Watkins was no rookie to the league and I don't think should just be slipped in with the rookies in the same manner...nor does it acknowledge that targets don't solely go to WRs. Our targets by players:

Lazard - 100
Jones - 72
Doubs - 67
Tonyan - 67
Watson - 66
Cobb - 50
Dillon - 43
Watkins - 22
Deguara - 15
Toure - 10
Amari Rodgers - 8
Lewis - 7
Davis - 7
Winfree - 4
Taylor - 1
Bakh - 1

Only three rookies are on that list or guys that would have been in their first

Let's look at the Chiefs last year.....2 of their top 3 targeted players were first year on that team guys...4 of their top 8 most targeted first year guys...5 of their 6 WRs targeted the whole season were first year guys with that team.

My point was that Watkins played his first season with the Packers last year as well. Good info on the Chiefs, it helps tremendously to have a tight end who finished the season with 110 receptions for 1,338 yards and 12 TDs though.

However, I played the "receiver only" game with KC as an example. Sure they had a much more dynamic TE, but we easily had a vastly more dynamic and better RB threat receiving options.

McKinnon and Edwards-Helaire combined for 73 receptions for 663 yards and 12 TDs compared to Jones and Dillon registering 87 receptions for 601 yards and five TDs. I don't consider those numbers to be easily in the Packers' favor.

 

[tynimiller]

My point was that Watkins played his first season with the Packers last year as well. Good info on the Chiefs, it helps tremendously to have a tight end who finished the season with 110 receptions for 1,338 yards and 12 TDs though.



McKinnon and Edwards-Helaire combined for 73 receptions for 663 yards and 12 TDs compared to Jones and Dillon registering 87 receptions for 601 yards and five TDs. I don't consider those numbers to be easily in the Packers' favor.

Okay if we are merely comparing stats to make calls this may shock some folks....let's stay with GB and KC:

Kansas City Chiefs WRs - 196 Receptions on 300 targets. Produced 2,653 yards and 13 TDs
Green Bay Packers WRs - 195 Receptions on 317 targets. Produced 2,514 yards and 17 TDs

Jones and Dillon are a much more lethal RB room in 2022 than KC's IMO....just as I'd argue despite production not illustrating it their WR was better than GB's in 2022 at least.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Okay if we are merely comparing stats to make calls this may shock some folks....let's stay with GB and KC:

Kansas City Chiefs WRs - 196 Receptions on 300 targets. Produced 2,653 yards and 13 TDs
Green Bay Packers WRs - 195 Receptions on 317 targets. Produced 2,514 yards and 17 TDs

Jones and Dillon are a much more lethal RB room in 2022 than KC's IMO....just as I'd argue despite production not illustrating it their WR was better than GB's in 2022 at least.

Goes to show you how much difference a quality TE and a mobile QB can make.

Tonyan: 53 rec. 470 yds 2 TD's

Kelce: 110 rec. 1338 yds 12 TD's


QB Rushing:

Rodgers: 34 attempts 94 yds 9 1st downs 1 TD

Mahomes: 61 attempts 358 yds 25 1st downs 4 TD's

Looking forward to see what Musgrave and Kraft can do, along with a more mobile Jordan Love.

 

[tynimiller]

Goes to show you how much difference a quality TE and a mobile QB can make.

Tonyan: 53 rec. 470 yds 2 TD's

Kelce: 110 rec. 1338 yds 12 TD's


QB Rushing:

Rodgers: 34 attempts 94 yds 9 1st downs 1 TD

Mahomes: 61 attempts 358 yds 25 1st downs 4 TD's

Looking forward to see what Musgrave and Kraft can do, along with a more mobile Jordan Love.

Yup

 

[Mondio]

Mahomes and Rodgers are very clearly at different points in their careers, but i'm not sure their mobility difference is what makes the TE so much better in KC. Brady can't take more than 2 steps sideways and he's had fantastic TE's at points in his career too. Good TE's are good TE's and GB has been severely lacking for years at that position.

 

[AmishMafia]

Mahomes and Rodgers are very clearly at different points in their careers, but i'm not sure their mobility difference is what makes the TE so much better in KC. Brady can't take more than 2 steps sideways and he's had fantastic TE's at points in his career too. Good TE's are good TE's and GB has been severely lacking for years at that position.

We just saw our biggest investment in TEs in Packer history with 2 premium picks. Twice we picked TEs in the first round, so probably more draft capital there. Maybe it's a statement that Gute suddenly sees value in the position, but I think it's more of a matter of desperate need and great TE talent depth availability in the draft.

Kelce is a phenom and would be successful with a lesser QB, IMHO.

 

[mradtke66]

Maybe it's a statement that Gute suddenly sees value in the position, but I think it's more of a matter of desperate need and great TE talent depth availability in the draft.

I'm not so naive to think that needs doesn't factor in at all with picks, but I'd put more weight on there being enough/the right TEs worthy of being picked when we were on the clock.

 

[AmishMafia]

I'm not so naive to think that needs doesn't factor in at all with picks, but I'd put more weight on there being enough/the right TEs worthy of being picked when we were on the clock.

When there is a surplus, teams may pass on a TE because they know they can still get a good one in the next round. I wouldn't have thought it a reach if Musgrave went in the first and Kraft in the 2nd. I think the value was excellent for both our picks.

 

[OldSchool101]

When there is a surplus, teams may pass on a TE because they know they can still get a good one in the next round. I wouldn't have thought it a reach if Musgrave went in the first and Kraft in the 2nd. I think the value was excellent for both our picks.

Oh yeah. I realize Musgrave was rated higher, but for whatever reason I was more invested in Tucker Kraft. Yes he’s more projection coming from a smaller school, but IF he transitions, I see him as one of the steals of this draft. He’s very Raw and had a limited Route Tree in College, but those things are going to change quickly.

I thought he’d be gone from late Round2 to early Round3, just before our #78 selection. His 255Lb X 23 Reps just outmuscles guys and he uses his Stocky frame to box out Defenders and there’s not much they can do about it. I was shocked to see the Ravens draft Strange at #61 overall. It allowed Tucker to fall right into our lap with our natural #78. I do think Kraft is a better long-term player than Strange.
Imo Tucker was the best value at where he was drafted (as far as long term ceiling) and for me, we drafted THREE 2nd round grade players
Musgrave, Reed, Kraft

 

[AmishMafia]

Oh yeah. I realize Musgrave was rated higher, but for whatever reason I was more invested in Tucker Kraft. Yes he’s more projection coming from a smaller school, but IF he transitions, I see him as one of the steals of this draft. He’s very Raw and had a limited Route Tree in College, but those things are going to change quickly.

I thought he’d be gone either to close Round2 or just before our #78 selection. His 255Lb X 23 Reps just outmuscles guys and he uses his Stocky frame to box out Defenders and there’s not much they can do about it. I was shocked to see the Ravens draft Strange at #61 overall Tucker fell right into our lap with our natural #78 and I think Kraft is a better long-term player.

Same. Tucker is the low key, hard working, humble, and high charactervyou can't help root for.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Okay if we are merely comparing stats to make calls this may shock some folks....let's stay with GB and KC:

Kansas City Chiefs WRs - 196 Receptions on 300 targets. Produced 2,653 yards and 13 TDs
Green Bay Packers WRs - 195 Receptions on 317 targets. Produced 2,514 yards and 17 TDs

Jones and Dillon are a much more lethal RB room in 2022 than KC's IMO....just as I'd argue despite production not illustrating it their WR was better than GB's in 2022 at least.

Interesting numbers. Maybe that Packers' quarterback wasn't such a wimp after all.

Goes to show you how much difference a quality TE and a mobile QB can make.

Tonyan: 53 rec. 470 yds 2 TD's

Kelce: 110 rec. 1338 yds 12 TD's


QB Rushing:

Rodgers: 34 attempts 94 yds 9 1st downs 1 TD

Mahomes: 61 attempts 358 yds 25 1st downs 4 TD's

Looking forward to see what Musgrave and Kraft can do, along with a more mobile Jordan Love.

Yeah, if only Rodgers was more mobile last season Tonyan would have put up numbers similar to Kelce

 

[AmishMafia]

Interesting numbers. Maybe that Packers' quarterback wasn't such a wimp after all.



Yeah, if only Rodgers was more mobile last season Tonyan would have put up numbers similar to Kelce

Lol, only you Cpt!

Or maybe the next time someone posts that ARs issues were because of a lack of receivers you can post, "Mahommes won a SB with receivers at the same level as Rodgers had."