Trade Theory

[Heyjoe4]

Lazard is a good player. Demeaning him because you don't like the corps as a whole is silly.

As to Cobb and Rodgers, it's not my first choice that they're on the roster, but they are (at least it seems that way for Rodgers).

Lazard IS a good player, for what's been expected of him. The question is does he have the stuff to make a jump now that Adams and MVS are gone. I don't know.

 

[Heyjoe4]

This post illustrates your lack of football knowledge. Is our WR room a 10 out of 10...nope....9...nope....8....nope....I'd say in the 6 or 7 range with upside. However even with Davante and MVS last year I wouldn't have said we were better than an 8 out of 10.

Agree with the current TE rating. Last year, the WR group was closer to a 7. Adams was a 10, everyone else was in the 5, 6 range. MVS was strictly a home run hitter. Fast guy, hands developed over time, limited route runner.

 

[tynimiller]

Lazard IS a good player, for what's been expected of him. The question is does he have the stuff to make a jump now that Adams and MVS are gone. I don't know.

His production of targets says yes, but the only unknown is when he is targeted say an additional 30-50 times in a year does he still produce such a SOLID catch percentage and such. If yes...you give him just 60 receptions instead of his customary 30-40 he is roughly 800 yards - 8 TD type guy or if true number one targets of around 100 a season you are looking at a 1,000 plus yard guy.

 

[Heyjoe4]

His production of targets says yes, but the only unknown is when he is targeted say an additional 30-50 times in a year does he still produce such a SOLID catch percentage and such. If yes...you give him just 60 receptions instead of his customary 30-40 he is roughly 800 yards - 8 TD type guy or if true number one targets of around 100 a season you are looking at a 1,000 plus yard guy.

I'd take either outcome.

 

[OldSchool101]

This post illustrates your lack of football knowledge. Is our WR room a 10 out of 10...nope....9...nope....8....nope....I'd say in the 6 or 7 range with upside. However even with Davante and MVS last year I wouldn't have said we were better than an 8 out of 10.

I agree.
2021, our WR room was an 7.5/10
2022, our WR “ “ 7/10
following the -/+ notated where they would rank leaguewide against peers.

2021
Davante WR1+
Lazard WR3
MVS WR3 (talented 1-trick pony)wR
Cobb WR4
Amari WR6+
Winfree WR6-
Malik Taylor WR7


2022 PROJECTION WITH +SNAPS
Watkins WR2-
Lazard WR2-
Cobb WR3-
Watson WR4+
Doubs WR4+
Rodgers WR5
Toure WR6

 

[Dantés]

Lazard IS a good player, for what's been expected of him. The question is does he have the stuff to make a jump now that Adams and MVS are gone. I don't know.

*A* jump? Absolutely.

But to what level, we can't be sure.

But he's a tough, versatile player, a good athlete, and a bully. The Packers certainly have a dearth of talent at WR, but Lazard is starting caliber.

 

[longtimefan]

Lazard IS a good player, for what's been expected of him. The question is does he have the stuff to make a jump now that Adams and MVS are gone. I don't know.

We dont need a wr to make a jump.. We need wr and te to play as they are capable.. And the rb to get added work

We dont replace (and cant replace Adams) you re group and we design your system.. Or you implement the system you wanted ( matt)

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Lazard is a good player. Demeaning him because you don't like the corps as a whole is silly.

As to Cobb and Rodgers, it's not my first choice that they're on the roster, but they are (at least it seems that way for Rodgers).

I too think Lazard is a good player. I just don’t believe he’s long term answer for #1 receiver; therefore, i don’t believe he’s a reason to avoid sending a 6th round pick out for a young receiver with enormous upside. See, there’s lots of unknowns and I’d rather have lots of shots at finding an elite receiver rather than having one fewer shot because the team has a proven #3 receiver.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

We dont need a wr to make a jump.. We need wr and te to play as they are capable.. And the rb to get added work

We dont replace (and cant replace Adams) you re group and we design your system.. Or you implement the system you wanted ( matt)

I don’t understand? Taking a jump doesn’t mean hurdling to best receiver in the NFL. When the packers play an elite defense in the playoffs they will absolutely need some stellar players from the rookies or sizable leaps (not jumps) from the others or you’re going to see a worse version of last year’s offense against the 49ers.

 

[OldSchool101]

We dont need a wr to make a jump.. We need wr and te to play as they are capable.. And the rb to get added work

We dont replace (and cant replace Adams) you re group and we design your system.. Or you implement the system you wanted ( matt)

I agree. Matt is a smart Coach and he’ll utilize his best and more experienced players more. All that said, elite QB’s of the past make the players around them rise to the occasion. Some examples are Bradshaw, Marino, Montana, Manning, Elway, Favre and Rodgers. Those of us that are old enough watched those QB’s throw to 7,8,9+ more players per game, and they were successful at it too.

If the QB is the Queen of the Chessboard. Then #12 is a Queen with Rook + Horse powers as a plus. #12 can get out of nearly any predicament. He’s had relatively below average resources overall Jennings, Jordy, Cobb, Adams were all bi-products of a Offense with superior OL coaching and a Receiver friendly system with a Master Technician at the helm. #12 and his expectations and stubbornness (as much as we may tease him) makes it all function like a well oiled machine.

I’m not saying trading for a player shouldn’t be a consideration. It should always be one. Yet I wouldn’t be in a hurry and we might just be surprised at what he can do spreading the ball around and using lots of play action. Rodgers will pick his poison and he’ll naturally flow to the hot hand at Receiver.

I still think Christian Watson is going to impress. My guess is the faster they get him involved the more dynamic he will be by playoffs.

 

[sschind]

I agree. Matt is a smart Coach and he’ll utilize his best and more experienced players more. All that said, elite QB’s of the past make the players around them rise to the occasion. Some examples are Bradshaw, Marino, Montana, Manning, Elway, Favre and Rodgers. Those of us that are old enough watched those QB’s throw to 7,8,9+ more players per game, and they were successful at it too.

If the QB is the Queen of the Chessboard. Then #12 is a Queen with Rook (Horse) powers as a plus. #12 can get out of nearly any predicament. He’s had relatively below average resources (draft/FA) to work with since Greg Jennings departure. Jordy, Cobb, Adams were all bi-products of a Offense with superior OL coaching and a Receiver friendly system with a Master Technician. It’s my belief we may never see as accurate a Passer and as formidable a Game Manager combination, possibly in our lifetimes. #12 and his expectations and stubbornness (as much as we may tease him) makes it all function like a well oiled machine.

I’m not saying trading for a player shouldn’t be a consideration. It should always be one. Yet I wouldn’t be in a hurry and we might just be surprised at what he can do spreading the ball around and using lots of play action. Rodgers will pick his poison and he’ll naturally flow to the hot hand at Receiver.

I still think Christian Watson is going to impress. My only question is how fast can he adapt, he lost valuable time. I think he’s absolutely good enough to floor out at WR3. His limit is dependent on usage and him focusing intently. He’s Packer WR1 capable if he maximizes his opportunities early on. That boy definitely won’t get run down by anyone in the open.

The rook is the castle not the horse. The horse is the Knight.

Yes,. Thats what I took from your post.

 

[OldSchool101]

The rook is the castle not the horse. The horse is the Knight.

Yes,. Thats what I took from your post.

Speaking of Rooks!
There I fixed it for you

Do you agree. Is he going to elevate these Receivers?

Or in your estimation are we more likely to spiral out of control and crash landing?

 

[Dantés]

I too think Lazard is a good player. I just don’t believe he’s long term answer for #1 receiver; therefore, i don’t believe he’s a reason to avoid sending a 6th round pick out for a young receiver with enormous upside. See, there’s lots of unknowns and I’d rather have lots of shots at finding an elite receiver rather than having one fewer shot because the team has a proven #3 receiver.

All I’m saying is that the constraints of building a roster don’t really allow you to accrue that many dudes who all basically play the same position.

 

[OldSchool101]

All I’m saying is that the constraints of building a roster don’t really allow you to accrue that many dudes who all basically play the same position.

Yes.
Plus we have our Laviska Shenault, high ceiling oft injured
His name is Sammy Watkins.

 

[Schultz]

I agree.
2021, our WR room was an 7.5/10
2022, our WR “ “ 7/10
following the -/+ notated where they would rank leaguewide against peers.

2021
Davante WR1+
Lazard WR3
MVS WR3 (talented 1-trick pony)wR
Cobb WR4
Amari WR6+
Winfree WR6-
Malik Taylor WR7


2022 PROJECTION WITH +SNAPS
Watkins WR2-
Lazard WR2-
Cobb WR3-
Watson WR4+
Doubs WR4+
Rodgers WR5
Toure WR6

IMO
Lazard- 2
nobody else is better than a 4.

 

[OldSchool101]

IMO
Lazard- 2
nobody else is better than a 4.

What is your rough definition of production for those WR categories in yards area?? I’ll start to be fair.

WR1 >1,100+ yards

WR2
WR3
WR4
WR5
WR6

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don’t know… with Lazard and Cobb and Rodgers, I’m not sure that the Packers needed to bring in a big slot.

Shenault has actually lined up on the outside more often than in the slot during his tenure with the Jaguars. I agree that I prefer Lazard getting those snaps instead of him though.

I agree.
2021, our WR room was an 7.5/10
2022, our WR “ “ 7/10
following the -/+ notated where they would rank leaguewide against peers.

2021
Davante WR1+
Lazard WR3
MVS WR3 (talented 1-trick pony)wR
Cobb WR4
Amari WR6+
Winfree WR6-
Malik Taylor WR7


2022 PROJECTION WITH +SNAPS
Watkins WR2-
Lazard WR2-
Cobb WR3-
Watson WR4+
Doubs WR4+
Rodgers WR5
Toure WR6

I don't believe the Packers receiving corps should be considered a 7 out of 10. You even mentioned that they lack a #1 wide receiver.

#12 can get out of nearly any predicament. He’s had relatively below average resources overall Jennings, Jordy, Cobb, Adams were all bi-products of a Offense with superior OL coaching and a Receiver friendly system with a Master Technician at the helm.

If you truly consider Jennings, Nelson, Cobb and Adams below average resources (which in my opinion is borderline crazy) you will not like the receivers Rodgers will have to throw to this year.

When talking about #12 elevating the performance of the pass catchers around him you once again conveniently ignore the 2015 season.

 

[Schultz]

What is your rough definition of production for those WR categories in yards area?? I’ll start to be fair.

WR1 >1,100+ yards

WR2
WR3
WR4
WR5
WR6

Not a fair question. Last year Packer roster to this year the answer would be much different. Some teams have clear #1s others have 1A & 1B.

 

[Heyjoe4]

*A* jump? Absolutely.

But to what level, we can't be sure.

But he's a tough, versatile player, a good athlete, and a bully. The Packers certainly have a dearth of talent at WR, but Lazard is starting caliber.

I agree Lazard is a starter. How far he takes it past the #3 WR is up to him.

I agree. Matt is a smart Coach and he’ll utilize his best and more experienced players more. All that said, elite QB’s of the past make the players around them rise to the occasion. Some examples are Bradshaw, Marino, Montana, Manning, Elway, Favre and Rodgers. Those of us that are old enough watched those QB’s throw to 7,8,9+ more players per game, and they were successful at it too.

If the QB is the Queen of the Chessboard. Then #12 is a Queen with Rook + Horse powers as a plus. #12 can get out of nearly any predicament. He’s had relatively below average resources overall Jennings, Jordy, Cobb, Adams were all bi-products of a Offense with superior OL coaching and a Receiver friendly system with a Master Technician at the helm. #12 and his expectations and stubbornness (as much as we may tease him) makes it all function like a well oiled machine.

I’m not saying trading for a player shouldn’t be a consideration. It should always be one. Yet I wouldn’t be in a hurry and we might just be surprised at what he can do spreading the ball around and using lots of play action. Rodgers will pick his poison and he’ll naturally flow to the hot hand at Receiver.

I still think Christian Watson is going to impress. My guess is the faster they get him involved the more dynamic he will be by playoffs.

"He’s had relatively below average resources overall Jennings, Jordy, Cobb, Adams..."

Do you really mean to say these guys are/were below-average receivers? I don't think that's what you mean, it looks like you're expressing more than one thought in a sentence. But please clarify. There's no way any objective person would label these guys as "below average".

 

[Heyjoe4]

Shenault has actually lined up on the outside more often than in the slot during his tenure with the Jaguars. I agree that I prefer Lazard getting those snaps instead of him though.



I don't believe the Packers receiving corps should be considered a 7 out of 10. You even mentioned that they lack a #1 wide receiver.



If you truly consider Jennings, Nelson, Cobb and Adams below average resources (which in my opinion is borderline crazy) you will not like the receivers Rodgers will have to throw to this year.

When talking about #12 elevating the performance of the pass catchers around him you once again conveniently ignore the 2015 season.

Can you elaborate on the 2015 season? I don't recall who Rodgers was throwing to.

And yeah Rodgers makes WRs look better than they are, but that has a ceiling. Any pass play is still a combination of QB and WR skill. If the WR runs the wrong route, or simply drops an otherwise great pass, well there's nothing Rodgers can do about that when it happens.

I'm not disputing that Rodgers makes WRs look good, only that it has a limit. The reverse holds true as well. Sometimes it's the WR making the QB look good.

 

[Poppa San]

Can you elaborate on the 2015 season? I don't recall who Rodgers was throwing to.

A "paddlehands" Adams, James Jones returned, Cobb. That's the season Jordy went down in preseason. Starks, Lacey, and Kuhn in the backfield.

 

[Heyjoe4]

A "paddlehands" Adams, James Jones returned, Cobb. That's the season Jordy went down in preseason. Starks, Lacey, and Kuhn in the backfield.

Thanks Poppa. Brings back memories, not very good ones. I loved the Adams pick but seriously questioned it his first two seasons. Glad I was wrong. I watched the game when Nelson tore his ACL. I'm pretty sure it was on artificial turf and looked like a normal jump and landing. That's why I hate artificial turf. It's like velcro and holds the foot in place too long.

And I remember it as the season after the disastrous NFCCG against the Hags.

Not pleasant times in GB.

 

[AKCheese]

If Rodgers is indeed a top 5 QB he should be able to produce well above average results with even bottom NFL tier WRs especially given our RB tandem. Time for the excuse making to stop and perform (including in big games)

 

[Heyjoe4]

If Rodgers is indeed a top 5 QB he should be able to produce well above average results with even bottom NFL tier WRs especially given our RB tandem. Time for the excuse making to stop and perform (including in big games)

I don't get all the hand wringing about new receiving personnel either, especially with #12 as QB. The Patriots changed the makeup of their WRs and TEs for years, and other changes as well. The one constant was Tom Brady. They won six SBs. So I agree. No whining allowed!

 

[OldSchool101]

If you truly consider Jennings, Nelson, Cobb and Adams below average resources (which in my opinion is borderline crazy) you will not like the receivers Rodgers will have to throw to this year.

I didn’t say they were bad players or anything about eventual success rates (although I was getting to that, so I’m glad you jumped ahead because your response will eventually prove my point)
We are both in 100% agreement on success and that’s where I’m going with this.

What is the average amount (only mediocre average here) of Day 1 draft and FA or trade signings each NFL team has had at WR since 2008?? If you can’t access that, just give us a guess

How many Day1 draft picks or Day1 FA or Day1 Trade WR contracts have went specifically to the Packers with WR since Rodgers officially started in 2008? (We can’t include Sammy Watkins as he hasn’t played yet). Remember please use Day 1 only


Probably easier to list the teams with just the top resources fed at WR and bottoms dweller resources fed at WR since 2008. I’m going to hazard a guess and say the Packers are either 32/32 or very near that. But you are excellent at stats, so I’d prefer you checked me on that.