Lance kendricks

[Deleted member 6794]

That's ********.

Another example of you feeling smarter than other posters and not accepting any differing opinions. I have dealt with guys like you on several occasions and fortunately they don't last long as their act is getting tired to a lot of members in the long haul.

 

[Dantés]

Another example of you feeling smarter than other posters and not accepting any differing opinions. I have dealt with guys like you on several occasions and fortunately they don't last long as their act is getting tired to a lot of members in the long haul.

Ok, you got me. I don't accept your opinion that I need to be told what I already know (and have stated) multiple times a day. Fair warning-- I don't think anyone on the forum is going to be "regarding" that particular opinion of yours.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Fair warning-- I don't think anyone on the forum is going to be "regarding" that particular opinion of yours.

I've been around this forum long enough for you not having to tell me how to act properly.

 

[Dantés]

I've been around this forum long enough for you not having to tell me how to act properly.

Aye aye cap'n.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Kendricks (125 plays) and Bennett (118) pass blocked more often than Cook (23) last season.

And why would that be? Because McCarthy rarely pass blocks with is TEs. If Cook had played all 16 games the spread would have still been remarkably wide.

It's kinda like the Packers being the presumptive favorite if there was an NFL basketball tournament. It's a somewhat irrelevant skill set. McCarthy banks on the fact that Rodgers is probably the most elusive QB behind the LOS in the history of the game. Lang complained about that; it made his job harder.

I don't see TE usage changing much in this regard.

 

[Dantés]

And why would that be? Because McCarthy rarely pass blocks with is TEs. If Cook had played all 16 games the spread would have still been remarkably wide.

It's kinda like the Packers being the presumptive favorite if there was an NFL basketball tournament. It's a somewhat irrelevant skill set. McCarthy banks on the fact that Rodgers is probably the most elusive QB behind the LOS in the history of the game. Lang complained about that; it made his job harder.

I don't see TE usage changing much in this regard.

Run blocking is where I would expect the improvement.

 

[HardRightEdge]

That's ********. Just because people are talking about options that are actually readily available doesn't mean that they don't recognize that long term the need is for a higher quality player. I know I for one have made that clear on multiple occasions. The #1 is a need, but if they can't get one that doesn't mean a mid level guy plus a rookie wouldn't at least help. But you're incapable of accepting that other people think that, so every time anyone posts about a mid level corner, you give them that mantra. Over and over and over. You're free to do that, but I'm also free to make fun of it.

I cannot condone your tone, but I do agree about House.

 

[brandon2348]

I thnk this team needs a defensive player with intensity who can fire up the huddle and back it up with performance. I don't see that particular need on offense.

There's Daniels, but having that figure on the D-Line doesn't do all that much good because he doesn't see what's happening on the field. Where you really need that is in the D-backfield, a guy who sees what's happening.

I'm not sure who that guy is in NE; they may not even need that guy with their collective attitude of mutual accountability on the field, but you don't build that kind of culture out of thin air. The accountability in Green Bay sits in the sky box, in the film room, and that's where Capers likes to keep it.

The truly amazing thing about NE's SB comeback was not Brady's performance, which was plenty amazing. It's that the defense didn't quit no matter how deep the hole got. Crosby misses a FG, Ripkowski fumbles, and the Packer defense goes in the tank. And the record of closing out games on the defensive side of the ball is dismal.

In the absence of the collective mindset, this team needs a Woodson-type figure, even if that guy is not quite a DPOY. That's assuming Capers would allow it, which is doubtful.

I agree with all this and have voiced my opinion about the defense for some time now. I don't have a lot of faith that TT and Capers can even build a solid defense anymore and maybe they realize that too.

Maybe the best they can do at this stage is just load Rodgers up with weapons and let him loose and hope we can get some timely turnovers and win that way. It could work.

They might be looking at the 6 games they lost where Cook was injured for 5 of them. They might see if they had a quality TE in offense they win let's say half of those. If that happened you could literally "reverse the seeding" and the Packers would of had the bye and hosting ATL in NFC Champ game.

Instead they had to try and beat 4 playoff teams in a row on the road and kind of ran out of gas in ATL.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Run blocking is where I would expect the improvement.

Somewhat, not markedly. Again, Cook was underrated as a run blocker. No TEs, including Bennett, go out and pancake guys. Cook was consistent in getting on his man and shielding him away from the play.

When Cook came in, I was surprised when the Captain reported that PFF graded Cook as something like the 11th. best run blocker in 2015 . So, I started watching some of that in game replays. 11th.-level looks about right, maybe better as the trend has continued toward oversized WRs at the position.

Even if Bennett is the #1 run blocking TE in the league, when you get down to it the difference between 1 and 11 is not that great. Maybe 1 better block per game.

Upgrade with these 2 new guys? Marginal perhaps, but with Bennett on the field most of the time you've lost a more potent downfield threat in Cook.

Now, if one expects McCarthy to suddenly go heavy with Bennett in-line at TE and Kendricks out of the slot for stretch- the-seam, which means benching Cobb in the staple 3 wide/single back, that's unrealistic. We'll probably see it, but it's not transformational in any way. If Kendricks proves up, we might see him in the slot in 4-wide with Bennett actually on the bench! Of course either of these scenarios leaves many fans' new favorite toy, Allison, not seeing the field at all.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Somewhat, not markedly. Again, Cook was underrated as a run blocker. No TEs, including Bennett, go out and pancake guys. Cook was consistent in getting on his man and shielding him away from the play.

When Cook came in, I was surprised when the Captain reported that PFF graded Cook as something like the 11th. best run blocker in 2015 . So, I started watching some of that in game replays. 11th.-level looks about right, maybe better as the trend has continued toward oversized WRs at the position.

Even if Bennett is the #1 run blocking TE in the league, when you get down to it the difference between 1 and 11 is not that great. Maybe 1 better block per game.

FYI Cook was rated significantly better as a run blocker than both Bennett and Kendricks last season.

 

[bigbubbatd]

FYI Cook was rated significantly better as a run blocker than both Bennett and Kendricks last season.

That is very interesting bc every report says Bennett is a very good blocking te (top 10 just a year ago) and that cook is average at best. First time I have seen cook labeled as a good blocker.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I agree with all this and have voiced my opinion about the defense for some time now. I don't have a lot of faith that TT and Capers can even build a solid defense anymore and maybe they realize that too.

Maybe the best they can do at this stage is just load Rodgers up with weapons and let him loose and hope we can get some timely turnovers and win that way. It could work.

They might be looking at the 6 games they lost where Cook was injured for 5 of them. They might see if they had a quality TE in offense they win let's say half of those. If that happened you could literally "reverse the seeding" and the Packers would of had the bye and hosting ATL in NFC Champ game.

Instead they had to try and beat 4 playoff teams in a row on the road and kind of ran out of gas in ATL.

Well, one thing where I'd lay heavy odds...this is going to be a defense-heavy draft with maybe a WR mixed into the top 3. It looks like Montgomery is going to be at least a part time RB. With Janis a bust and Davis buried in the depth chart, the absolutely critical position of WR looks awfully thin.

Possible spoiler alert: how shocked would the denizens of this forum be if the Packers went WR in the first or second round (!), a RB in the top 4, Randall and Rollins as starting corners, and the rest of the draft devoted to a third corner (either slot or perimeter for the ever present nickel/dime) and OLB, D-Line, and O-Line depth.

A bit surprising, but it would not be shocking.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That is very interesting bc every report says Bennett is a very good blocking te (top 10 just a year ago) and that cook is average at best. First time I have seen cook labeled as a good blocker.

While tight ends don't block on a lot of passing plays Kendricks and Bennett excelled in that are while Cook struggled with it.

 

[swhitset]

A player running a 4.3 seperates more than four yards over 40 yards from one clocking in at 4.8. That's a huge difference.

I addressed that above..... football isn't a foot race where everything is fair and equal... a defensive back doesn't have to start at the line..... etc... most plays are not straight line "go" routes and a decent D back can even inhibit those. While it is not apparently clear.... I have seen 40 times for Jerry Rice posted anywhere between 4.55 and 4.7. Take whatever number you wish... by those standards ... he was not a "burner" yet many consider him to be the best ever. So again my point was that those differences in 40 times are not all that significant... 2-4 feet would be if a receiver is given a free release and the D back doesn't react.... but good technique and reaction time etc... should close that window.

 

[HardRightEdge]

FYI Cook was rated significantly better as a run blocker than both Bennett and Kendricks last season.

That's both hilarious and believable. I focused on Cook's run blocking in replays on maybe 15 occasions. I did not see him miss a block.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Possible spoiler alert: how shocked would the denizens of this forum be if the Packers went WR in the first or second round (!), a RB in the top 4, Randall and Rollins as starting corners, and the rest of the draft devoted to a third corner (either slot or perimeter for the ever present nickel/dime) and OLB, D-Line, and O-Line depth.

If the Packers don't address cornerback and outside linebacker before the draft I would be extremely shocked and disappointed.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I addressed that above..... football isn't a foot race where everything is fair and equal... a defensive back doesn't have to start at the line..... etc... most plays are not straight line "go" routes and a decent D back can even inhibit those. While it is not apparently clear.... I have seen 40 times for Jerry Rice posted anywhere between 4.55 and 4.7. Take whatever number you wish... by those standards ... he was not a "burner" yet many consider him to be the best ever. So again my point was that those differences in 40 times are not all that significant... 2-4 feet would be if a receiver is given a free release and the D back doesn't react.... but good technique and reaction time etc... should close that window.

There's no doubt too much stock is being put into 40 times at the combine and pro days but those numbers shouldn't be disregarded as completely irrelevant either.

 

[Dantés]

I can't say I studied both players' run blocking in 2016, but on the balance of their careers Bennett has been the far superior player in that regard. I guess we will find out.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I addressed that above..... football isn't a foot race where everything is fair and equal... a defensive back doesn't have to start at the line..... etc... most plays are not straight line "go" routes and a decent D back can even inhibit those. While it is not apparently clear.... I have seen 40 times for Jerry Rice posted anywhere between 4.55 and 4.7. Take whatever number you wish... by those standards ... he was not a "burner" yet many consider him to be the best ever. So again my point was that those differences in 40 times are not all that significant... 2-4 feet would be if a receiver is given a free release and the D back doesn't react.... but good technique and reaction time etc... should close that window.

I have been seeing more opinions like the one in this article about the importance of the 3 cone drill over the 40 and the reasons, much like yours, makes more sense to me.

http://www.startribune.com/three-co...-scouting-combine-actually-matters/415168674/

 

[Dantés]

I have been seeing more opinions like the one in this article about the importance of the 3 cone drill over the 40 and the reasons, much like yours, makes more sense to me.

http://www.startribune.com/three-co...-scouting-combine-actually-matters/415168674/

I love the 3 cone as an indicator. There are positions where the 40 matters a lot, but usually in terms of minimums. Corner is the prime example. Depending on the scheme, you're going to want to set a long speed bench mark.

 

[brandon2348]

Well, one thing where I'd lay heavy odds...this is going to be a defense-heavy draft with maybe a WR mixed into the top 3. It looks like Montgomery is going to be at least a part time RB. With Janis a bust and Davis buried in the depth chart, the absolutely critical position of WR looks awfully thin.

Possible spoiler alert: how shocked would the denizens of this forum be if the Packers went WR in the first or second round (!), a RB in the top 4, Randall and Rollins as starting corners, and the rest of the draft devoted to a third corner (either slot or perimeter for the ever present nickel/dime) and OLB, D-Line, and O-Line depth.

A bit surprising, but it would not be shocking.

It wouldn't shock me either especially after what they have done so far in free agency.

What would everyone do if They traded up for Mike Williams in first?

Then draft Mixon in second? If they miss out on Mixon they could go OLB here and get a guy like Marlon Mack in 4th. He would be a great "playmate" with Monty IMO.

Then draft Demontae Kazee in 3rd to plug in slot?

 

[swhitset]

I love the 3 cone as an indicator. There are positions where the 40 matters a lot, but usually in terms of minimums. Corner is the prime example. Depending on the scheme, you're going to want to set a long speed bench mark.

I agree it is much more important in a corner..... A D back will inevitably have to react to a receiver's advantaged cuts... recovery speed is crucial for the D back here. Sam shields was a burner ... Deon Sanders was a burner etc... But this thread is about Tight Ends where I don't think the difference in 40 times is quite so important.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It wouldn't shock me either especially after what they have done so far in free agency.

What would everyone do if They traded up for Mike Williams in first?

Then draft Mixon in second? If they miss out on Mixon they could go OLB here and get a guy like Marlon Mack in 4th. He would be a great "playmate" with Monty IMO.

Then draft Demontae Kazee in 3rd to plug in slot?

If they traded up for Williams, they most likely don't have a 2nd and perhaps a 3rd round pick.

However, if all that happened and no more FA's were signed, I would expect the Packers offense to be playing from behind almost every game.

 

[brandon2348]

If they traded up for Williams, they most likely don't have a 2nd and perhaps a 3rd round pick.

However, if all that happened and no more FA's were signed, I would expect the Packers offense to be playing from behind almost every game.

Then they could stay put and draft "Zay Jones".

I bet TT absolutely loves Jones. His type of receiver.

 

[Half Empty]

I addressed that above..... football isn't a foot race where everything is fair and equal... a defensive back doesn't have to start at the line..... etc... most plays are not straight line "go" routes and a decent D back can even inhibit those. While it is not apparently clear.... I have seen 40 times for Jerry Rice posted anywhere between 4.55 and 4.7. Take whatever number you wish... by those standards ... he was not a "burner" yet many consider him to be the best ever. So again my point was that those differences in 40 times are not all that significant... 2-4 feet would be if a receiver is given a free release and the D back doesn't react.... but good technique and reaction time etc... should close that window.

As with some other discussions, this isn't either/or, and examples on both sides abound - I'll see your Jerry Rice and raise you a Bullet Bob Hayes. The point should be that, regardless of anything else, faster is better - given everything else that Rice had going for him, make him 4.3 in the 40, and...