Packers 1st round selection, #12 overall: Rashan Gary, DE

[Pokerbrat2000]

People will say "his first second third and fourth picks were all busts". To which I would reply "yeah but his fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth picks were home runs so does it really matter.

I guess it depends on how you measure home runs and success on an individual basis and in totality as well. If the expectation is to get "x number of players from each draft to do y". Then you are correct, it shouldn't matter where in the draft those players were drafted. Unfortunately, I don't think that it's quite that simple. For instance, if you used pick #12 in the Draft on a FG kicker and by year 3, he was a top 5 kicker. Then in the next years draft, you used pick #241 on a QB, that also becomes a top 5 QB 3 years later, which was the better pick between those 2 players? Now flip it...the QB was #12 and Kicker was #241, which was the better pick or same results?

Also, if you look at the draft history of the Packers, as you get later in the Draft, on average the picks have been less successful. Makes sense, a player picked high probably has more talent and thus a better chance at succeeding and contributing more, but also probably a bigger failure, if the bust.

While I get what you're saying, basically once the draft pick is used, it's gone and all that matters in 3 years and beyond, is the contribution of the player. That said, I consider Jeff Janis (7th round pick) a much better pick than say Jason Spriggs (2nd+ rounder). They had similar careers with Green Bay as far as contributions, but Janis was a meager investment in comparison.

 

[gopkrs]

I consider Jeff Janis (7th round pick) a much better than say Jason Spriggs (2nd+ rounder).

You have a strange way of looking at it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You have a strange way of looking at it.

Enlighten me.

 

[Zartan]

Knowing the medical staff they will probably sit him with bye week next week. Good thing the bye week is when it is to get the hurt players healthy again.

 

[OldSchool101]

We’re going to need a Bye year at this rate
Seriously though. I’m beginning to believe that the Packers are being extra cautious with returning injured players because of our record. With each passing Win we can afford to sit players a few extra weeks.
Gary is too important to our playoff success. We can beat the Vikings without him and it would make sense to see what we have we have in the wings. If they think Rashan needs 1-2 weeks off?
I’d hold him out until after the Bye that’s a nearly a month to recoup.

 

[gopkrs]

Enlighten me.

I tried arguing draft statuses with you before. Your smiley face tells it all. No thanks.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I tried arguing draft statuses with you before. Your smiley face tells it all. No thanks.

It's ok...but to be clear, I don't view it as...arguing...I like to call it a civil discussion between 2 minds.

 

[sschind]

Whoever gets 4 all-pros out of 8 picks in a single draft has to be considered the GOAT of GMs.

Yup, and some people will still ***** if those 4 all pros were not the first 4 picks

You have a strange way of looking at it.

He's been waiting a long time for just the right time to bring up Jeff Janis, Just let him have his moment in the sun.

I guess it depends on how you measure home runs and success on an individual basis and in totality as well. If the expectation is to get "x number of players from each draft to do y". Then you are correct, it shouldn't matter where in the draft those players were drafted. Unfortunately, I don't think that it's quite that simple. For instance, if you used pick #12 in the Draft on a FG kicker and by year 3, he was a top 5 kicker. Then in the next years draft, you used pick #241 on a QB, that also becomes a top 5 QB 3 years later, which was the better pick between those 2 players? Now flip it...the QB was #12 and Kicker was #241, which was the better pick or same results?

Also, if you look at the draft history of the Packers, as you get later in the Draft, on average the picks have been less successful. Makes sense, a player picked high probably has more talent and thus a better chance at succeeding and contributing more, but also probably a bigger failure, if the bust.

While I get what you're saying, basically once the draft pick is used, it's gone and all that matters in 3 years and beyond, is the contribution of the player. That said, I consider Jeff Janis (7th round pick) a much better pick than say Jason Spriggs (2nd+ rounder). They had similar careers with Green Bay as far as contributions, but Janis was a meager investment in comparison.

If you are drafting a kicker with #12 you shouldn't be around to draft that QB at #241 the next year. (just trying to beat Schultz before he says it) I understand the higher expectation that comes with a higher draft pick and that's fine I have higher expectations for them as well. It's just that I prefer to look at results when judging a player who has been in the league for a few years. To put a different spin on it lets say you draft a RB with your first round pick and another with your 7th round pick. Your offense is geared to a RB by committee approach so both get a lot of playing time and after 3 years both RBs have racked up surprisingly similar stats and were considered to be in the upper third of RBs in the league . You would say because less draft capital was used on him and the expectations for him to succeed were less that the 7th rounder was a better pick and I can see why you would think that. To me though a pick is a pick and both were good picks. Yes I would rather have more higher picks because like I said the odds they pan out are greater but in the end the result are all that matter.

 

[PackAttack12]

It's ok...but to be clear, I don't view it as...arguing...I like to call it a civil discussion between 2 minds.

Well that’s no fun.

 

[easyk83]

Some people on sports message boards will take a position on a player or draft pick and then just refuse to reverse such position even if the player turns into a smash hit, I guess maybe they think it enhances their online brand? Personally I think they come across as fools.

 

[PackAttack12]

Some people on sports message boards will take a position on a player or draft pick and then just refuse to reverse such position even if the player turns into a smash hit, I guess maybe they think it enhances their online brand? Personally I think they come across as fools.

I've always been the type where yes, I do like to debate and I have strong opinions. But if there's enough evidence, or if there's a strong enough case made, I'm open to changing my mind. No issue whatsoever in admitting when I'm wrong.

Still waiting for this to actually happen though.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

To put a different spin on it lets say you d raft a RB with your first round pick and another with your 7th round pick. Your offense is geared to a RB by committee approach so both get a lot of playing time and after 3 years both RBs have racked up surprisingly similar stats and were considered to be in the upper third of RBs in the league . You would say because less draft capital was used on him and the expectations for him to succeed were less that the 7th rounder was a better pick and I can see why you would think that.

That's actually a great way to break it down, by comparing 2 players at the same position. Since, yes, my K and QB were pretty extreme in trying to prove my point. So back to your RB's.
If you get pretty much equal players with a 1st and a 7th round pick, at the end of the 4 or so years, I can see why one might say "2 solid picks from that draft class." However, you invested a ton more in the first RB picked, since you could have traded that pick for multiple picks and still kept your 7th rounder. Hell, you might have ended up drafting 3-4 really solid players with all those picks you got in the trade. Now that draft class became much more successful that your previous one.

Basically, the higher the pick, the higher your odds of getting a better player and the higher the expectations on his performance. Later the pick, the less you expect out of them. Getting a solid backup and good special teams player from a 7th rounder is good, but from the 4th guy picked in the entire Draft, not that good.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I've always been the type where yes, I do like to debate and I have strong opinions. But if there's enough evidence, or if there's a strong enough case made, I'm open to changing my mind. No issue whatsoever in admitting when I'm wrong.

Still waiting for this to actually happen though.

Damn, I can't debate that first part at all...but that second part....

 

[Poppa San]

At midpoint of their 3rd seasons, was Gary a better pick than AJ Hawk? AJ started every game his 1st 3 seasons and had 7 sacks with 3 picks

 

[gopkrs]

At midpoint of their 3rd seasons, was Gary a better pick than AJ Hawk? AJ started every game his 1st 3 seasons and had 7 sacks with 3 picks

imo definitely

 

[tynimiller]

It’s okay to say Hawk you was more useful out the gate but not a better pick or player

 

[Schultz]

Yup, and some people will still ***** if those 4 all pros were not the first 4 picks



He's been waiting a long time for just the right time to bring up Jeff Janis, Just let him have his moment in the sun.




If you are drafting a kicker with #12 you shouldn't be around to draft that QB at #241 the next year. (just trying to beat Schultz before he says it) I understand the higher expectation that comes with a higher draft pick and that's fine I have higher expectations for them as well. It's just that I prefer to look at results when judging a player who has been in the league for a few years. To put a different spin on it lets say you draft a RB with your first round pick and another with your 7th round pick. Your offense is geared to a RB by committee approach so both get a lot of playing time and after 3 years both RBs have racked up surprisingly similar stats and were considered to be in the upper third of RBs in the league . You would say because less draft capital was used on him and the expectations for him to succeed were less that the 7th rounder was a better pick and I can see why you would think that. To me though a pick is a pick and both were good picks. Yes I would rather have more higher picks because like I said the odds they pan out are greater but in the end the result are all that matter.

A great example is Jamaal Williams and Aaron Jones. I believe JW went 1 round earlier than AJ. Now I consider AJ a great pick and JW a very good pick but not because of where they were drafted but because of their performances on the field for the GB Packers. I felt obligated to reply.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

A great example is Jamaal Williams and Aaron Jones. I believe JW went 1 round earlier than AJ. Now I consider AJ a great pick and JW a very good pick but not because of where they were drafted but because of their performances on the field for the GB Packers. I felt obligated to reply.

Not just a round, but almost 50 picks separated them. While I agree that Aaron was a fantastic pick at #182, I would say Jamaal was just an average pick at #134. I say that based on what resources the Packers used to acquire and pay each guy, their 4 years of stats and their new contracts. No comparison with contracts, Jones is on a 3 year $12M/year with $13M guaranteed. Jamaal on the other hand is only on a 2 year, $3M/year and only $3.25M guaranteed.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

my problem with gary has always been where he was drafted. someone taken that high in the draft should not need three years to get going. at least not for someone that plays that position. but i realize that is just my opinion. i'm glad he is playing well now, but i think we could have found someone better in the two drafts that followed and then we would have gotten better value.

I didn't like the Packers selecting Gary with the 12th overall pick in 2019 either, mainly because the team had just signed the Smiths to huge contracts in free agency. As expected it took until one of them suffered an injury for Gary's playing time to significantly increase.

With that being said it's pretty obvious the Packers drafted an elite player I'm definitely glad is on the roster.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

With that being said it's pretty obvious the Packers drafted an elite player I'm definitely glad is on the roster.

Helps with the cap too when you can find players like Gary, that are playing a position that is on the higher end of the salary spectrum. Of course, the Packers were already shelling out a lot for the Smith Brothers, but Gary's emergence definitely makes losing 1 or both of them for 2022 a bit more palatable. The Packers will have Gary for 1 more season on his rookie deal (~$4M) and then could exercise his 5th year option, which last year was $12.716M for his position.

 

[tynimiller]

Helps with the cap too when you can find players like Gary, that are playing a position that is on the higher end of the salary spectrum. Of course, the Packers were already shelling out a lot for the Smith Brothers, but Gary's emergence definitely makes losing 1 or both of them for 2022 a bit more palatable. The Packers will have Gary for 1 more season on his rookie deal (~$4M) and then could exercise his 5th year option, which last year was $12.716M for his position.

Looking towards 2022 I found myself more and more comfortable with the for sure loss of one Smith and maybe two. However large part of that for me was the emergence and development we were seeing in Rivers. Who knows what player he comes back as after this significant injury. I love Preston and his consistency - I pray we can work something out to keep him here but he's already re-worked to stay once, cannot keep expecting it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Looking towards 2022 I found myself more and more comfortable with the for sure loss of one Smith and maybe two. However large part of that for me was the emergence and development we were seeing in Rivers. Who knows what player he comes back as after this significant injury. I love Preston and his consistency - I pray we can work something out to keep him here but he's already re-worked to stay once, cannot keep expecting it.

Yup, the ripple effect of paying Rodgers, Bahk and AJ top money for their positions. I do love AJ, but with the way Dillion has been playing this season, I can't help but wonder if the Packers might have been better off not resigning him. I guess one could say the same about Bahk. It will be nice to get him back, but it isn't like the OL has been a train wreck since his injury last season.

 

[tynimiller]

Yup, the ripple effect of paying Rodgers, Bahk and AJ top money for their positions. I do love AJ, but with the way Dillion has been playing this season, I can't help but wonder if the Packers might have been better off not resigning him. I guess one could say the same about Bahk. It will be nice to get him back, but it isn't like the OL has been a train wreck since his injury last season.

Jenkins truly makes the Bahk money arguably a misstep....BUT when we signed Bahk there was NO way any of us knew we were going to find arguably an even more versatile and LT of the future in Jenkins if we so choose.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Jenkins truly makes the Bahk money arguably a misstep....BUT when we signed Bahk there was NO way any of us knew we were going to find arguably an even more versatile and LT of the future in Jenkins if we so choose.

Well said and really the same could be said about the Smith Brothers and Gary. Even last year there was some questions as to whether Gary would make the next step. It is a nice luxury to have great depth on the OL and at OLB, but as it turns out, the Packers paid the price to have it.

I wish they had the same luxury at WR, but if they let Adams walk, who do they have that even comes close to his production?

 

[tynimiller]

Well said and really the same could be said about the Smith Brothers and Gary. Even last year there was some questions as to whether Gary would make the next step. It is a nice luxury to have great depth on the OL and at OLB, but as it turns out, the Packers paid the price to have it.

I wish they had the same luxury at WR, but if they let Adams walk, who do they have that even comes close to his production?

Lot of IFS, but the OL growth could cause one way we get through this cap mess is life without Bahk in it honestly.

The WR room has amazing depth, but lacks true separation at the top which would be so incredibly hard to overcome without the one truly separated talent at the top. We'd be forced into a corner of the draft that Gute and ANY person should hate, and that is having to leave the first 50-65 picks of the draft with a WR, you just couldn't not - and that is zero guarantees to work.