Pass Rushing Stats Need Context

[Poppa San]

Looks like several somebodies missed their nap.

 

[OldSchool101]

Then we wouldn't have been able to meet our quota of drafting 5 guys who really have no shot of ever being a quality NFL player.

Yes, but that's really not that hard to accomplish when your draft order is the last couple of guys per round for nearly a decade (in which case 2-3 solid starters per season isn't really that awful) Most pass rushers that are deemed at a level to be a quality starter or even being an immediate impact pass rusher are long gone late second round. Fan expectations and excitement often exceed the statistical reality of the draft for sure. If we draft a pass rusher type after round 2 that's basically a project guy that might develop in a year or two at best.
Players take time to develop and the earlier in the round you draft, the higher the potential to land a quality rusher that can contribute.

This is exactly why I think if we don't get a premier pass rusher round 1 this year, we'd better be prepared to move up earlier into round 2 so we're not picking from a scrap pile (no offense Vince) This is especially true this year, because for once we have the combination of draft capital (with our placing and numbers of picks) to move into a formidable position for a someone that should statistically be an immediate contributor. I believe there will be a particular player on our radar that slips into late round 1 or early round 2 that we should consider snagging.
Pick #14 is no mans land in a way. It likely not good enough to get one of the very best pass rushers, but it's too early to pick a 2nd tier guy that could slip 15-20 more spots and leave us with potentially wasted resources. We finally have the opportunity and resources to get it right, we can't afford to miss this year with the top couple of picks and we need to stick it this draft. I'm hoping we continue our aggressiveness in this draft like we did in FA

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yes, but that's really not that hard to accomplish when your draft order is the last couple of guys per round for nearly a decade (in which case 2-3 solid starters per season isn't really that awful) Most pass rushers that are deemed at a level to be a quality starter or even being an immediate impact pass rusher are long gone late second round. Fan expectations and excitement often exceed the statistical reality of the draft for sure. If we draft a pass rusher type after round 2 that's basically a project guy that might develop in a year or two at best.

Unfortunately the Packers had some terrible drafts not yielding two or three solid starters over the past few years. In combination with Thompson being reluctant to plug holes on the roster with veterans that has left the team short on talent at several positions.

Of course it's more likely to select an impact player early in the draft, Lawson should work as evidence that there's a possibility to acquire an impact edge rusher on day 3 as well.

 

[Fat Dogs]

Yes, but that's really not that hard to accomplish when your draft order is the last couple of guys per round for nearly a decade (in which case 2-3 solid starters per season isn't really that awful) Most pass rushers that are deemed at a level to be a quality starter or even being an immediate impact pass rusher are long gone late second round. Fan expectations and excitement often exceed the statistical reality of the draft for sure. If we draft a pass rusher type after round 2 that's basically a project guy that might develop in a year or two at best.
Players take time to develop and the earlier in the round you draft, the higher the potential to land a quality rusher that can contribute.

This is exactly why I think if we don't get a premier pass rusher round 1 this year, we'd better be prepared to move up earlier into round 2 so we're not picking from a scrap pile (no offense Vince) This is especially true this year, because for once we have the combination of draft capital (with our placing and numbers of picks) to move into a formidable position for a someone that should statistically be an immediate contributor. I believe there will be a particular player on our radar that slips into late round 1 or early round 2 that we should consider snagging.
Pick #14 is no mans land in a way. It likely not good enough to get one of the very best pass rushers, but it's too early to pick a 2nd tier guy that could slip 15-20 more spots and leave us with potentially wasted resources. We finally have the opportunity and resources to get it right, we can't afford to miss this year with the top couple of picks and we need to stick it this draft. I'm hoping we continue our aggressiveness in this draft like we did in FA

I 1,000 % agree. I understand the argument that the more darts you have to throw the better the odds But we've thrown many darts and this method hasn't proved its worth enough to continue the trend. I hear fans wanting to trade back from #14. No!!! We have the capital to move up. We need impactful starters from day 1. Move up a few spots and give up our 3rd and 6th and then move up again early 2nd. Don't care about trying to hit on 5th, 6th, and 7th rounders. We need to come out of this draft with 4 quality starters.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

I don’t understand why Biegel has already been written off by many.

Davante Adams was also written off by more than a few Packer faithful......Some players develop more slowly than others.

I don't know what the future holds for Vince Biegel, but I'm cautiously optimistic. I think his arrow is pointing up.

 

[Dantés]

Davante Adams was also written off by more than a few Packer faithful......Some players develop more slowly than others.

I don't know what the future holds for Vince Biegel, but I'm cautiously optimistic. I think his arrow is pointing up.

And in this case it isn't even development... he was just hurt.

 

[Mike McCarthy]

So what I’m taking away from this thread is some of you feel certain players statlines need to include a participation trophy asterisk, due to said player not getting the job done for numerous reasons, great idea.

 

[elcid]

I 1,000 % agree. I understand the argument that the more darts you have to throw the better the odds But we've thrown many darts and this method hasn't proved its worth enough to continue the trend. I hear fans wanting to trade back from #14. No!!! We have the capital to move up. We need impactful starters from day 1. Move up a few spots and give up our 3rd and 6th and then move up again early 2nd. Don't care about trying to hit on 5th, 6th, and 7th rounders. We need to come out of this draft with 4 quality starters.

I did not take his view as an advocate of moving up at all. Yes, we have thrown many darts, but none were as often in the first or second rounds as they could potentially be this year by trading down. I agree that neither Chubb nor Ward is gonna be there at 14. To me, outside of these guys there are no clear cut prospects at these positions that we will HAVE to take at 14. Guys that I'd be interested in (Landry and Carter for OLB, Jackson/Hughes/Alexander/Oliver for CB) have a high chance of going outside of the top 20 picks. If none of the do it all players in James and Fitzpatrick or absolutely rare talents in Nelson and Edmunds slip, I'd strongly consider moving out of 14.

If we were to be able to convert that 14 into more draft value (Im really thinking NE is a likely candidate of moving to our range of picks if one of there QB favorites were to slip - maybe the Colts want to add another top prospect and considers handing in both their seconds and third for our first and third) we are always able to move up an extra few picks. Then there is still plenty of high impact players (mentioned above) to be had.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I did not take his view as an advocate of moving up at all. Yes, we have thrown many darts, but none were as often in the first or second rounds as they could potentially be this year by trading down. I agree that neither Chubb nor Ward is gonna be there at 14. To me, outside of these guys there are no clear cut prospects at these positions that we will HAVE to take at 14. Guys that I'd be interested in (Landry and Carter for OLB, Jackson/Hughes/Alexander/Oliver for CB) have a high chance of going outside of the top 20 picks. If none of the do it all players in James and Fitzpatrick or absolutely rare talents in Nelson and Edmunds slip, I'd strongly consider moving out of 14.

If we were to be able to convert that 14 into more draft value (Im really thinking NE is a likely candidate of moving to our range of picks if one of there QB favorites were to slip - maybe the Colts want to add another top prospect and considers handing in both their seconds and third for our first and third) we are always able to move up an extra few picks. Then there is still plenty of high impact players (mentioned above) to be had.

The Packers shouldn't move back from the 14th pick as the chances are definitely higher to draft an impact player at that point than later in the first round.

 

[Fat Dogs]

I did not take his view as an advocate of moving up at all. Yes, we have thrown many darts, but none were as often in the first or second rounds as they could potentially be this year by trading down. I agree that neither Chubb nor Ward is gonna be there at 14. To me, outside of these guys there are no clear cut prospects at these positions that we will HAVE to take at 14. Guys that I'd be interested in (Landry and Carter for OLB, Jackson/Hughes/Alexander/Oliver for CB) have a high chance of going outside of the top 20 picks. If none of the do it all players in James and Fitzpatrick or absolutely rare talents in Nelson and Edmunds slip, I'd strongly consider moving out of 14.

If we were to be able to convert that 14 into more draft value (Im really thinking NE is a likely candidate of moving to our range of picks if one of there QB favorites were to slip - maybe the Colts want to add another top prospect and considers handing in both their seconds and third for our first and third) we are always able to move up an extra few picks. Then there is still plenty of high impact players (mentioned above) to be had.

Chubb definitely will be gone but I've seen Ward, Fitzpatrick, James, and Edmunds all over the board on these mocks. One or two will start to slide but may or may not get to #14. Why take the chance? Don't give away the farm but why would we not jump up 2 or 3 spots for a bonafide stud that could help us day 1. We have a unique opportunity to get top 10 talent because of the QB run and we need to take advantage.

 

[Fat Dogs]

The Packers shouldn't move back from the 14th pick as the chances are definitely higher to draft an impact player at that point than later in the first round.

I haven't been this excited for a draft in a long time and Will be pissed if we passed on any of these players to move back.

 

[swhitset]

I did not take his view as an advocate of moving up at all. Yes, we have thrown many darts, but none were as often in the first or second rounds as they could potentially be this year by trading down. I agree that neither Chubb nor Ward is gonna be there at 14. To me, outside of these guys there are no clear cut prospects at these positions that we will HAVE to take at 14. Guys that I'd be interested in (Landry and Carter for OLB, Jackson/Hughes/Alexander/Oliver for CB) have a high chance of going outside of the top 20 picks. If none of the do it all players in James and Fitzpatrick or absolutely rare talents in Nelson and Edmunds slip, I'd strongly consider moving out of 14.

If we were to be able to convert that 14 into more draft value (Im really thinking NE is a likely candidate of moving to our range of picks if one of there QB favorites were to slip - maybe the Colts want to add another top prospect and considers handing in both their seconds and third for our first and third) we are always able to move up an extra few picks. Then there is still plenty of high impact players (mentioned above) to be had.

on the one hand you argue that there are no impact players left by 14 so we should move down.... in the other hand you are arguing that other teams will want to trade up to that position. I agree with those that say, we are rarely in a position to pick as high as 14... we should not throw that chance away... especially in a draft where we already have a plethora of late round picks.

 

[OldSchool101]

I 1,000 % agree. I understand the argument that the more darts you have to throw the better the odds But we've thrown many darts and this method hasn't proved its worth enough to continue the trend. I hear fans wanting to trade back from #14. No!!! We have the capital to move up. We need impactful starters from day 1. Move up a few spots and give up our 3rd and 6th and then move up again early 2nd. Don't care about trying to hit on 5th, 6th, and 7th rounders. We need to come out of this draft with 4 quality starters.

We have the draft Capital to do exactly that. As an example, I'd like to see us trade #45 and #67 for #33 and #114 with Cleveland IF a player we deem first round grade slips.
Then to further that illustration of using draft capital, we could f0llow it by trading #114 (acquired in the first deal) and #133 to move back into a 3rd round comp (again if we see some value players slipping)
That alone would give us something like #14, #33,#99, #101 to start with and that still leaves us plenty of room to trade again day 3 (move well into the 4th round again etc..)

 

[Fat Dogs]

We have the draft Capital to do exactly that. As an example, I'd like to see us trade #45 and #67 for #33 and #114 with Cleveland IF a player we deem first round grade slips.
Then to further that illustration of using draft capital, we could f0llow it by trading #114 (acquired in the first deal) and #133 to move back into a 3rd round comp (again if we see some value players slipping)
That alone would give us something like #14, #33,#99, #101 to start with and that still leaves us plenty of room to trade again day 3 (move well into the 4th round again etc..)

This is a great draft plan and I'd be elated if Gute took this aggressive approach. I know some teams hit on 6th and 7th rounders but not us. I went back and saw 22 packer 6th and 7th round selections since 2010 and the only two worth mentioning were James Starks and Rip. The other 20 were wasted pics that could have been traded into better early round players. 5th rounders weren't impressive either.

 

[elcid]

This is a great draft plan and I'd be elated if Gute took this aggressive approach. I know some teams hit on 6th and 7th rounders but not us. I went back and saw 22 packer 6th and 7th round selections since 2010 and the only two worth mentioning were James Starks and Rip. The other 20 were wasted pics that could have been traded into better early round players. 5th rounders weren't impressive either.

People seem to forget that even half a dozen 7 round picks will probably only move you up a few spots in the third round. I'd rather see them draft players that for any concern whatsoever have slipped from the middle rounds with these picks instead of trading them all away for a few spots.

 

[Fat Dogs]

People seem to forget that even half a dozen 7 round picks will probably only move you up a few spots in the third round. I'd rather see them draft players that for any concern whatsoever have slipped from the middle rounds with these picks instead of trading them all away for a few spots.

I respect that and wish we hit on more of those but unfortunately we haven't. I guess every scenario is different. I'm no expert on point values but I'd easily trade our 4th and 6th to jump up four spots in round #1 to take a Ward or James. Just saying I like the idea of trading our 6th & 7th rounders to sweeten the deal on a potential trade up Even if it's only a few spots (in early rounds) for highly ranked prospects.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I respect that and wish we hit on more of those but unfortunately we haven't. I guess every scenario is different. I'm no expert on point values but I'd easily trade our 4th and 6th to jump up four spots in round #1 to take a Ward or James. Just saying I like the idea of trading our 6th & 7th rounders to sweeten the deal on a potential trade up Even if it's only a few spots (in early rounds) for highly ranked prospects.

The Packers fourth and sixth round pick are most likely only good enough to move up two spots in the first round though.

 

[Poppa San]

I'm no expert on point values

Use this chart as an example

 

[Fat Dogs]

The Packers fourth and sixth round pick are most likely only good enough to

Use this chart as an example

two 4's, two fives, and a six just to move up 4 spots??? Ummm...
New plan. We are staying put at #14 and getting the best damn player available!!!

 

[Fat Dogs]

Use this chart as an example

Thanks for the chart. I had no idea that first round trade ups were so costly and that 6th and 7th rounders were worth so little. I still love the idea of an aggressive trade up approach in the 2nd or 3rd but elcid is right. Those late round gambles are more valuable to us than throwing them away for penuts.

 

[easyk83]

I don’t understand why Biegel has already been written off by many.

Some people wanted someone else, and some fans only give a player one year to succeed.

 

[Fat Dogs]

Thanks for the chart. I had no idea that first round trade ups were so costly and that 6th and 7th rounders were worth so little. I still love the idea of an aggressive trade up approach in the 2nd or 3rd but elcid is right. Those late round gambles are more valuable to us than throwing them away for penuts.

I know I keep harping on this but thoughts keep popping in my head. Last point and then I'll leave it alone. This point system is a useful tool but isn't set in stone. Let's say the 49ers are in love with a Calvin Ridley, or a Marcus Davenport and know both will be available 5 picks later because of team needs. Surely they wouldn't turn down a 4th and 6th to move back and still get the player they coveted if no better offers were presented??

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I had no idea that first round trade ups were so costly and that 6th and 7th rounders were worth so little. I still love the idea of an aggressive trade up approach in the 2nd or 3rd but elcid is right. Those late round gambles are more valuable to us than throwing them away for penuts.

You have to realize that the Packers would have to find another team interested in acquiring those late round picks for Gutekunst to move up in the draft as well.

This point system is a useful tool but isn't set in stone. Let's say the 49ers are in love with a Calvin Ridley, or a Marcus Davenport and know both will be available 5 picks later because of team needs. Surely they wouldn't turn down a 4th and 6th to move back and still get the player they coveted if no better offers were presented??

There's no way teams can be 100% sure about the intention of other clubs. In addition a team agreeing to move back in the draft still want to receive fair value in return.

 

[Fat Dogs]

You have to realize that the Packers would have to find another team interested in acquiring those late round picks for Gutekunst to move up in the draft as well.



There's no way teams can be 100% sure about the intention of other clubs. In addition a team agreeing to move back in the draft still want to receive fair value in return.

Fair enough. Drafts never go the way everyone anticipates. I think we are in a good spot to either move up or some team unexpectedly drafts a WR or OL pushing D talent our way.

 

[Poppa San]

Thanks for the chart. I had no idea that first round trade ups were so costly and that 6th and 7th rounders were worth so little. I still love the idea of an aggressive trade up approach in the 2nd or 3rd but elcid is right. Those late round gambles are more valuable to us than throwing them away for penuts.

Realize that chart isn't current. It doesn't have all the trades in it nor the comp picks so after round three the point values are even less. Top of round 4 is pick 101, not 97.