Bob Vance Refrigeration
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2019
- Messages
- 29
- Reaction score
- 6
Definitely a possibility but considering they gave him another 1-year deal, it seems more likely that he showed them something worth keeping around.
Tight Ends Situation
- Thread starter XPack
- Start date
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
I have to admit it was surprising the Packers re-signed Lewis after hardly using him last season.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Well, Lewis had 191 snaps on a team with only 281 RB carries (with no fullback/H-back carries). I don't think that includes many snaps out of the slot, and after the first couple of games, Kendricks was the primary H-back blocker. I would guess Lewis was in-line blocking on close to 50%, maybe more, of the Packer run plays.
If we didn't notice him that might be because we didn't see him blowing guys off the line or pancaking a guy at the second level, the kinds of "highlight" plays you're going to get from an in-line TE blocker.
Further, this business about the LaFleur outside zone blocking being something new in Green Bay is an exageration. McCarthy ran a lot of outside stretch zone blocking which emphasizes quickness, coordination and defensive recognition on the fly. Aaron Jones commented that it looks very familiar. We didn't see Lewis making notable blocks on the move in those plays either.
As discussed previously, given the Titans fairly heavy use of the H-back last season, I'm not sure Kendricks (or somebody like him) would not be a better fit as that second, blocking TE with the versatility to work in-line and H-back, something Lewis evidently lacks, or at least lacked last season. Kendricks remains a free agent. Of course, he was one of the guys who sat during the National Anthem and has a marijuana bust on his record. Or maybe he's holding out for more money when an injury leads some to team to desperation? So, there's that.
The long and short of it is I'm not convinced Lewis will make the final roster. What kind of offense is LaFluer going to run? A McVay-style offense where LaFleur cut his teeth as OC (without play calling responsibility), where TE snaps were less last season than even in McCarthy's offense, or the diametrically opposed Titans offense where LaFleur was calling plays, with heavy TE use?
I don't know, and I don't think anybody should assume one approach or the other when the evidence suggests where LaFleur finds the better talents will dictate.
Last edited by a moderator:
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Well, if you liked being an NFL football player, were in good health, got paid $500,000 before you even showed up for the first day of work, and you could make up to $2.1 mil over the course of a year, would you retire?Still surprised he didn't retire
I would not, but i'm equally surprised they brought him back considering how little they used him and he's not getting younger. The Packers were about the only team to come calling last year for his services, I can't imagine the interest went up since then
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Why the Packers brought him back is a different question than why he didn't retire. Known quantity, deep experience, durable, "professional" in the other sense of the word, nobody else on the roster who's proven to be even a serviceable blocker to this point?
Regardless, the $500,000 signing bonus is not a particular impendiment to him being released before opening day. At this stage you could think of the signing bonus as a fairly inexpensive option on his services. Perhaps before that fateful final cutdown day LaFleur will have concluded he'll get more of what he'll need out of Vitale at FB as the primary supplemental blocker than he would from Lewis in-line. That would be a $900,000 net cap savings with Lewis' release and Vitale's retention.
Perhaps LaFleur will see the need for both if he wants to run the ball in the fashion of last year's Tennessee offense. If he is actually a McVay acolyte, with talent permitting, it could be something else. Those two teams were very different in how and how often they used TEs/lead blockers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bob Vance Refrigeration
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2019
- Messages
- 29
- Reaction score
- 6
I was pretty surprised but I don't hate it. I think he still has a year or 2 of good blocking ahead of him. We won't need him in the receiving game with Jimmy and Sternberger.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
According to PFF the Packers lined up Lewis inline on 170 of his 190 snaps last season.
I'm absolutely convinced the Packers won't use Lewis as a receiver regularly. Hopefully he will be improved blocking over last season though.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
That's about what I figured. The 20 non-inline might have a included a few out of the slot; maybe one from wideout (but I doubt it), with the rest from the H-back positiion. My eye test says his H-back snaps came earlier in the season with McCarthy switching away to Kendricks after that.
Some of the inline snaps might have been passing plays, but not many I'd say.
Since the Packers RBs ran the ball only 281 times, with no FB or H-back runs, and only 3 WR runs, Lewis needed only 142 inline snaps on called run plays to get to 50% of the run play snaps. I think it is fair to say he passed that mark.
The idea that Lewis was not used much would be a fantasy player conclusion since he was nearly invisiobe in the passing game with only 4 targets. He was, however, a key part of the run blocking scheme. It just so happens the Packers ran the ball an exceptionally low number of times.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
According to PFF Lewis blocked for the run on 116 of his 191 offensive snaps. In addition he was used in pass protection on another 34 plays. In total he ran only 41 routes in 2018.
The rest of his snaps came with him being lined up in the slot nine times, seven as a wideout and four in the backfield.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
There's a Q&A video with Lewis on packers.com where he said, to paraphrase, "I'm not just a blocker. I didn't come here to be a tackle." There is other evidence to support your contention and that Lewis will be disappointed if he in fact makes the final roster.
Consider the following snap counts from Football Outsiders which include the Rams playoff games; TE snaps are based on roster position, not field position:
2018 Packers
1075 offensive snaps
1368 TE offensive snaps
127% TE offensive snaps
124 TE targets (Graham led with 89)
11.5% TE targets per offensive snap
9.1% TE targets per TE snap
2018 Titans
986 offensive snaps
1501 TE offensive snaps
152% TE offensive snaps
89 TE targets (Jonnu led with 30 targets; Delanie Walker was injured and played only one game)
9.0% TE targets per offensive snap
5.9% TE targets per TE snap
2018 Rams
1100 offensive snaps
1208 TE offensive snaps
110% TE offensive snaps
85 TE targets (Gerald Everett led with 50)
7.7% TE targets per offensive snap
7.0% TE targets per offensive snap
If one is to believe that LaFleur will channel his inner McVay or instead run an offense similar to Tennessee last season (two very different things), one commonality is throwing little to TEs. Graham had the same or more targets than all the TEs on either of these teams.
For whatever sophistication one wants to attribute to the passing scheme in the McVay offense or LaFleur's derivation of it, it evidently does not include throwing the ball to TEs with any regularity.
Now, we could say the contrast of these two teams to last year's Packers is a function of available talent, that Graham is better receiving threat than any of the guys on those teams last season. That's quite reasonable. But if that's the conclusion, then it goes to the argument that making assumptions about what a LaFleur Packer offense will look like based on what the Rams or Titans did would be jumping to an unfounded conclusion.
About the only assumption worth making is that the Packers will run the ball more next season if for no other reason than Packer runs last season were an extremely low snap percentage. How much more? There are a few primary factors in that:
1) The health and productivity of the RBs.
2) How often the Packers are playing from behind vs. playing from ahead.
3) The degree of confidence in the defense to keep points off the board.
4) How often Rodgers will override the run call in the huddle or at the line. OK, just kidding on this last one. Sort of.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
That's interesting. So, that gets us to Lewis blocking on 41% of the called runs, still a decent percent.
The data bears out my eye test that the Packers found Lewis inadequate in the H-back role with only 4 snaps there.
16 snaps at slot and wideout is more than I would have thought, but at one per game I suppose they'd be easy to miss.
The 34 pass protection snaps begs a question: how many of those were run-to-pass audibles or huddle overrides? We'll never know.
I'm pleased to hear that. They seemed to be underutilized under McCarthy.
OP
OP
XPack
Cheesehead
It the TE rumours holds true, I'm excited to see Tonyan in action more.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
You can go just a couple of posts up to #37 to see how you might be disappointed.
The "LaFleur likes to us a a lot of TEs" story line derives from his high TE usage in Tennessee last season. That was because LaFleur ran a run-heavy offense; those TEs were used primarily as blockers. That probably has more to do with the receiving talent on that team than any predisposition. TE's were targetted in Tennessee less often than in Green Bay last season despite a much higher aggregate TE snap count.
Again, as a McVay acolyte, compare to the Rams last season where TE targets were lower than even in Tennessee.
Graham was targeted last season as much or more than all the TEs on both of those teams.
I would not expect the LaFluer offense to be modeled on what he did in Tennessee. I would expect play mix and target mix to be based on the where he finds the best talent and opportunities.
The only thing I would bank on is a higher run mix only because it was so excruciatingly low last season.
Pkrjones
Cheesehead
As HRE mentioned there's not much real "history" to fall back on as far as TE usage, yet. My hope is that Tonyan shows adequate blocking skills to earn significant playing time where his 4.59 speed can also be used in the receiving game. That's young-Graham speed, but unfortunately neither Lewis nor Graham can move, anymore.
I guess we'll see. There's more to TE usage than just snaps and counts. I think our TE's will be more productive in this type of offense because we'll line up and run or pass from the same formations. 2 TE's won't always mean run. I think it will open up opportunities to be used like TE's again. Our TE's, besides, Graham, hardly saw the field. And Graham was basically a big bodied WR, like he has been in his career, and he was our 2nd receiving threat behind Adams. It's not a wonder he got a ton of snaps, but I don't think we used him very well. Sure they put him on the field and threw him the ball and being the most senior and member of a relatively zero experience collection of pass catchers, I'd have expected him to be a lot more productive and have a lot more opportunities too. I think the Seahawks threw the ball to Graham more than the Packers did last year. Richard Rodgers had more opportunities a few years ago than Graham had last year. Not sure if we threw the ball close to 70% of the time or not that year either, which would make that even more significant.
I'm not suggesting MaLF is going to get the TE's over a hundred targets each or anything, but I do think we'll see a shift in the type of production from TE's in this offense.
I'm not suggesting MaLF is going to get the TE's over a hundred targets each or anything, but I do think we'll see a shift in the type of production from TE's in this offense.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Snaps and targets pretty much define usage. Where is your evidence for the rest?
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
For what's it is worth, the full gamut of athletic measurabes from Graham's Combine/Pro Day vs.Tonyan's Pro Day are very comparable:
http://www.draftscout.com/dsprofile.php?PlayerId=103531&DraftYear=2010
http://www.draftscout.com/dsprofile.php?PlayerId=125539&DraftYear=2017
It's worth noting that Graham was simply a bigger guy, 24 more lbs., taller, bigger hands and especially longer arms. Not that it made him a good blocker.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Why not actually look this stuff up and cite it? It is easy to do.
Graham 2017: 16 games, 96 targets, 741 snaps, 68.4% snap count
Graham 2018: 16 games, 89 targets, 795 snaps, 75.7% snap count
Seattle used Graham somewhat less and threw to him somewhat more, but the differences are not particularly striking. In the final analysis, Seattle targetted Graham about 1 additional time over 2 games.
Richard Rodgers had 85 targets in 2015, a few less than Graham last season. His next highest number was 47 in 2016. That was the season Nelson missed with the ACL injury, Adams was gimped up for most of the season, and James Jones was fading and slow which defenses caught up with as the season wore on. There was a short pass emphasis illustrated in the target counts:
Cobb = 129 (10.5 yds. per catch)
Jones = 99
Adams = 94
Rodgers = 85
Starks + Lacy = 81
The pass play count is closely equivalent to pass attempts + sacks + QB runs.
In 2018, that total was 741. In 2015, it was 681. Graham's targets per pass play = 12.0%. Rodgers in 2015 was 12.5%.
Looking only at actual pass attempts, Graham was 89 targerts on 640 attempts = 13.9%; Rodgers in 2015 was 14.8%.
Graham and Rodgers usage in those two seasons were very close with Rodgers getting a slight edge.
Of course one key difference in those two seasons was Adams getting 169 targets in 2018. Had Nelson played in 2015 with the 151 targets he got in 2014, its fair to say Rodgers would have seen the ball less.
Rodgers relatively high target number in 2015, with no season close to it before or since, has more to do with the alternatives and playing from behind less often.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
"Real" history will be the 2019 season, with this personnel, were we to have this discussion at this time next year. But the "suggestive" history of Tennessee or the Rams last season shows is not featuring the TE in the passing game. Saying the Packers will use more TEs in general and throw to them strikes me as a wish projection.
I don’t have any evidence is just a ****ing guess somehow I think they’re going to do it this year i’ll see if I have any evidence by the time January rolls around . Lol
Why don't I look it up? because I really don't care that much. I get a feeling from MaLF that he wants to keep personnel groups on the field and run a lot of plays from that whereas recently we've put 40 personnel groups on the field to run 40 different plays. Don't bother looking it up, its hyperbole, an exaggeration, but if we had 2 TE's on the field you knew 99% of the time it wasn't a pass play and you knew the ball wasn't going to TE on the other .8% of the time. Again, another exaggeration, but there's probably some truth in there somewhere
We threw the ball a shitton, that's a lot for those not familiar with the ***** scale of measurements, and Graham was on the field for a lot of them. I'd expect him to have had 140 targets last year considering Adams was the only other legitimate pass catcher on the team.
They say they want RB's involved more in the pass game, I have a feeling for that to be successful, they'll have TE's on too and they'll run, having passing plays to WR's with TE and RB activity to draw defenses and open that WR much like we've always done. But to make it like Malf wants, they'll have to be successful with the RB part of those looks AND the TE parts of those looks because if they know it's just a play action pass to a WR every time it won't work.
It's a long ways from I think they'll use TE's differently this year to "featuring a TE in the pass game" no TE is going to be featured on any team with Devante Adams as your #1 WR. ever
Why don't I look it up? because I really don't care that much. I get a feeling from MaLF that he wants to keep personnel groups on the field and run a lot of plays from that whereas recently we've put 40 personnel groups on the field to run 40 different plays. Don't bother looking it up, its hyperbole, an exaggeration, but if we had 2 TE's on the field you knew 99% of the time it wasn't a pass play and you knew the ball wasn't going to TE on the other .8% of the time. Again, another exaggeration, but there's probably some truth in there somewhere
We threw the ball a shitton, that's a lot for those not familiar with the ***** scale of measurements, and Graham was on the field for a lot of them. I'd expect him to have had 140 targets last year considering Adams was the only other legitimate pass catcher on the team.
They say they want RB's involved more in the pass game, I have a feeling for that to be successful, they'll have TE's on too and they'll run, having passing plays to WR's with TE and RB activity to draw defenses and open that WR much like we've always done. But to make it like Malf wants, they'll have to be successful with the RB part of those looks AND the TE parts of those looks because if they know it's just a play action pass to a WR every time it won't work.
It's a long ways from I think they'll use TE's differently this year to "featuring a TE in the pass game" no TE is going to be featured on any team with Devante Adams as your #1 WR. ever
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Good to know.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Actually the Packers used 11 personnel on 77.2% of the offensive plays last season, the second highest number in the league behind the Rams.
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2019/2018-offensive-personnel-analysis
Similar threads
