Wide Receiver Options

[sschind]

It just depends on the player, as well as the other players left on the board at that time.

Early OL tend to be among the safer positional picks, so if you have an OL rated highly beside players at other positions with question marks, take the OL.

This goes to what I have always said about the dangers of a GM going into a draft with his mind made up that he has to do one thing or shouldn't do another. GMs need to be flexible. Just because you have hit on late round picks in the past doesn't mean you should pass on superior talent when it is there just because you feel you need to draft another position.

They tend to be... doesn't mean they are.

Always depends on the individual.

You must have missed the public service announcement from the CECICIMB in the AJ Dillon thread. I'll try to give you the short version. If you use words like " chance" or "tend to" you must make sure you also acknowledge the possibility that the opposite may occur otherwise someone will be forced to point it out. Even though words like "chance" and "tend to" come with a built in implication that the outcome may not happen.

For example if you say early OL picks tend to be safer picks without specifically mentioning that it is not always the case someone will be forced to bring up Tony Mandarich.

For the record, that year I wanted Thomas or Sanders. Wasn't happy when they went with Mamwich.

Lots of people would have preferred another player. Of course most of those people came to that decision a year or two after the draft. While Sanders or Thomas would have been great picks I think you would be hard pressed to find many people who thought Mandarich was not a top 5 talent.

 

[gopkrs]

This goes to what I have always said about the dangers of a GM going into a draft with his mind made up that he has to do one thing or shouldn't do another. GMs need to be flexible. Just because you have hit on late round picks in the past doesn't mean you should pass on superior talent when it is there just because you feel you need to draft another position.


You must have missed the public service announcement from the CECICIMB in the AJ Dillon thread. I'll try to give you the short version. If you use words like " chance" or "tend to" you must make sure you also acknowledge the possibility that the opposite may occur otherwise someone will be forced to point it out. Even though words like "chance" and "tend to" come with a built in implication that the outcome may not happen.

For example if you say early OL picks tend to be safer picks without specifically mentioning that it is not always the case someone will be forced to bring up Tony Mandarich.



Lots of people would have preferred another player. Of course most of those people came to that decision a year or two after the draft. While Sanders or Thomas would have been great picks I think you would be hard pressed to find many people who thought Mandarich was not a top 5 talent.

Everyone thought Mandarich was a sure hall of famer. Nobody seemed to know he was taking steroids.

 

[tynimiller]

Everyone thought Mandarich was a sure hall of famer. Nobody seemed to know he was taking steroids.

Yeah folks claiming they knew he’d be a bust now after the fact are lying to themselves

 

[Pkrjones]

This really has nothing to do with "Wide Receiver Options". Maybe you could head over to "Draft Busts" or one of the "Offensive Lineman" threads? Thanks.

 

[wist43]

Yeah folks claiming they knew he’d be a bust now after the fact are lying to themselves

I didn't know he'd be a bust. Rather...

For me, I have always valued pass rush #1, and corners #2.

Still do.

 

[Schultz]

To keep the thread on track, I absolutey never considered Mandarich a wide receiver option.

 

[tynimiller]

To keep the thread on track, I absolutey never considered Mandarich a wide receiver option.

Very true

 

[sschind]

This really has nothing to do with "Wide Receiver Options". Maybe you could head over to "Draft Busts" or one of the "Offensive Lineman" threads? Thanks.

It has to do with the attitude that some people have that we have to take WR with a particular pick or even the first two picks and which WRs are good options with that pick. Maybe no WR would be the best option with that pick if someone better is available.

I'm just going to assume you were being sarcastic. After all there are plenty of WR discussions going on in non WR threads if thats what you want to talk about. I think there is a good one going on in the AJ Dillon thread. Or maybe that's the Jordan Love discussion

 

[Pkrjones]

I'm just going to assume you were being sarcastic. After all there are plenty of WR discussions going on in non WR threads if thats what you want to talk about. I think there is a good one going on in the AJ Dillon thread. Or maybe that's the Jordan Love discussion

You may be ok with one thread titled "Football" but I prefer joining threads that interest me and ignoring those that don't. If I really wanted to rehash Tony Mandarich information from 30 years ago I'd actively search out that thread. I WAS part of this thread because WR was important to me...but I've UNWatched it so go ahead & discuss former Packer cheerleaders from 1976, Tony Mandarich, or some OL prodigy eligible for the '25 draft.

 

[Spanky]

It has to do with the attitude that some people have that we have to take WR with a particular pick or even the first two picks and which WRs are good options with that pick. Maybe no WR would be the best option with that pick if someone better is available.

I'm not of the opinion that the Packers need to take a WR at a specific draft position, but they damn sure better be taking one in the first two rounds. And I'd prefer they take two in the first two rounds assuming there is quality there to support the pick position because the cupboard is so bare at that position.

But I was of the same opinion in 2020 and we saw what happened. WR was a serious need and Gutey (who I generally like a lot) traded up to take Love when he could have stayed at the Packer's original 1st round position and taken either Michael Pittman Jr. or Tee Higgins, which is exactly what I wanted at the time. How nice would it be to have Pittman or Higgins on the roster instead of Love? The one silver lining to that mistake is that drafting Love lit a fire under AR's a** and no doubt helped propel him back to an MVP level in 2020 and 2021.

 

[tynimiller]

I’m also not in the camp of “must take this” or “this many” of any position at any point.

But it has grown clear Aidan Hutchinson could fall to #22 and a segment of our fan base would be pissed with Gute for not taking a WR LOL

There is a decently solid chance one of our two for sure first rounders isn’t even offensive depending on how things drop and positional runs that occur.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I’m also not in the camp of “must take this” or “this many” of any position at any point.

But it has grown clear Aidan Hutchinson could fall to #22 and a segment of our fan base would be pissed with Gute for not taking a WR LOL

There is a decently solid chance one of our two for sure first rounders isn’t even offensive depending on how things drop and positional runs that occur.

The packers NEED a receiver that can contribute this year. If they don’t have a plan to acquire a vet then they darn well better draft a receiver. This team is NOT competing for a Super Bowl with Lazard and Cobb as the top receivers. I’m not saying they have to take a receiver over Hutchinson, I’m saying that they need to find a way to add something at receiver or this season is going to end in playoff disappointment yet again.

For those advocating that the defense and a solid running game are enough; why the f$ck did the packers pay THAT much money to Rodgers to just p!ss the passing game away with one of the league’s worst receiving corps?

 

[tynimiller]

The packers NEED a receiver that can contribute this year. If they don’t have a plan to acquire a vet then they darn well better draft a receiver. This team is NOT competing for a Super Bowl with Lazard and Cobb as the top receivers. I’m not saying they have to take a receiver over Hutchinson, I’m saying that they need to find a way to add something at receiver or this season is going to end in playoff disappointment yet again.

For those advocating that the defense and a solid running game are enough; why the f$ck did the packers pay THAT much money to Rodgers to just p!ss the passing game away with one of the league’s worst receiving corps?

You literally replied to my comment, but nothing I actually said really lol

 

[wist43]

I’m also not in the camp of “must take this” or “this many” of any position at any point.

But it has grown clear Aidan Hutchinson could fall to #22 and a segment of our fan base would be pissed with Gute for not taking a WR LOL

There is a decently solid chance one of our two for sure first rounders isn’t even offensive depending on how things drop and positional runs that occur.

I'm in the camp of 2 WR's in the first 4 picks though... 1 in the 1st, 1 in the 2nd.

There will be quality options in both rounds.

Also, 2 of any OT/OL, DT, Edge...
There are a couple of good Safeties in that range. No TE's, in there... the same with RB and QB. CB is always in the conversation.

Still, 2 WR's in the 1st 4 picks needs to happen given the talent distribution.

 

[sschind]

You may be ok with one thread titled "Football" but I prefer joining threads that interest me and ignoring those that don't. If I really wanted to rehash Tony Mandarich information from 30 years ago I'd actively search out that thread. I WAS part of this thread because WR was important to me...but I've UNWatched it so go ahead & discuss former Packer cheerleaders from 1976, Tony Mandarich, or some OL prodigy eligible for the '25 draft.

I be more sensitive to your plight if you were not contributing to the derailment of a number of threads yourself. Seems to me you are the on who brought up Bruce Clark in the AJ Dillon thread. As far as Packer cheerleaders from 1975 I don't know much about that but I'm looking at my Old Style beer posters from 1985 and 1986 and some of them were pretty good looking.

I'm not of the opinion that the Packers need to take a WR at a specific draft position, but they damn sure better be taking one in the first two rounds. And I'd prefer they take two in the first two rounds assuming there is quality there to support the pick position because the cupboard is so bare at that position.

But I was of the same opinion in 2020 and we saw what happened. WR was a serious need and Gutey (who I generally like a lot) traded up to take Love when he could have stayed at the Packer's original 1st round position and taken either Michael Pittman Jr. or Tee Higgins, which is exactly what I wanted at the time. How nice would it be to have Pittman or Higgins on the roster instead of Love? The one silver lining to that mistake is that drafting Love lit a fire under AR's a** and no doubt helped propel him back to an MVP level in 2020 and 2021.

The packers NEED a receiver that can contribute this year. If they don’t have a plan to acquire a vet then they darn well better draft a receiver. This team is NOT competing for a Super Bowl with Lazard and Cobb as the top receivers. I’m not saying they have to take a receiver over Hutchinson, I’m saying that they need to find a way to add something at receiver or this season is going to end in playoff disappointment yet again.

For those advocating that the defense and a solid running game are enough; why the f$ck did the packers pay THAT much money to Rodgers to just p!ss the passing game away with one of the league’s worst receiving corps?

I agree with both of you. The Packers need a WR and IMO even two in the draft. I know I have seen a few posters saying the Packers NEED to take a WR with at least one of their first round picks and maybe even both. I would not mind at all if they took two within the first three rounds or even two in the first round as long as they stay true to their board. The last thing I want however is for Gute to pass on a superior prospect just because he NEEDS a WR. My guess is his board will be constructed in such a way that at every pick he will have a WR he views worthy of taking. If someone he has rated significantly higher happens to be there he will take that guy but if not he will take the WR.

I’m also not in the camp of “must take this” or “this many” of any position at any point.

But it has grown clear Aidan Hutchinson could fall to #22 and a segment of our fan base would be pissed with Gute for not taking a WR LOL

There is a decently solid chance one of our two for sure first rounders isn’t even offensive depending on how things drop and positional runs that occur.

And I feel this is the only way to approach a draft with the POSSIBLE exception of QB. We all know there will be a team or two who will reach to get one and as far as I am concerned the more the better. I wish this draft class was deeper at QB so there would be more that teams that might go up to get one. That would help push other positions down.

I'm in the camp of 2 WR's in the first 4 picks though... 1 in the 1st, 1 in the 2nd.

There will be quality options in both rounds.

Also, 2 of any OT/OL, DT, Edge...
There are a couple of good Safeties in that range. No TE's, in there... the same with RB and QB. CB is always in the conversation.

Still, 2 WR's in the 1st 4 picks needs to happen given the talent distribution.

Like I said, I would be fine with that but your last sentence is what I am talking about. The mentality that this is what NEEDS to happen. I guess it kinda speaks to my comments about words like "Some" and "tend to" in a way. When you say 2 of the first 4 picks need to be WRs I am thinking that this is the only correct option in your mind and if it doesn't happen Gute has failed or screwed up. If that's the way you feel that's the way you feel but I disagree. I really hope we get 2 WRs in the first 2 days with 1 in the first (I'll accept a a 3rd rounder as opposed to demanding one be a second rounder) but I won't go so far as to say that's what needs to happen because I don't want to reach. Like you said though, quality options will be there so I if it happens I will be very happy.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

You literally replied to my comment, but nothing I actually said really lol

It was more the topic, didn’t mean to single you out (though i obviously did). Apologies.

 

[wist43]

I be more sensitive to your plight if you were not contributing to the derailment of a number of threads yourself. Seems to me you are the on who brought up Bruce Clark in the AJ Dillon thread. As far as Packer cheerleaders from 1975 I don't know much about that but I'm looking at my Old Style beer posters from 1985 and 1986 and some of them were pretty good looking.




I agree with both of you. The Packers need a WR and IMO even two in the draft. I know I have seen a few posters saying the Packers NEED to take a WR with at least one of their first round picks and maybe even both. I would not mind at all if they took two within the first three rounds or even two in the first round as long as they stay true to their board. The last thing I want however is for Gute to pass on a superior prospect just because he NEEDS a WR. My guess is his board will be constructed in such a way that at every pick he will have a WR he views worthy of taking. If someone he has rated significantly higher happens to be there he will take that guy but if not he will take the WR.



And I feel this is the only way to approach a draft with the POSSIBLE exception of QB. We all know there will be a team or two who will reach to get one and as far as I am concerned the more the better. I wish this draft class was deeper at QB so there would be more that teams that might go up to get one. That would help push other positions down.


Like I said, I would be fine with that but your last sentence is what I am talking about. The mentality that this is what NEEDS to happen. I guess it kinda speaks to my comments about words like "Some" and "tend to" in a way. When you say 2 of the first 4 picks need to be WRs I am thinking that this is the only correct option in your mind and if it doesn't happen Gute has failed or screwed up. If that's the way you feel that's the way you feel but I disagree. I really hope we get 2 WRs in the first 2 days with 1 in the first (I'll accept a a 3rd rounder as opposed to demanding one be a second rounder) but I won't go so far as to say that's what needs to happen because I don't want to reach. Like you said though, quality options will be there so I if it happens I will be very happy.

As I said, given the talent distribution.

DT drops off after Wyatt, Hall, and Winfrey - so I would definitely be targetting one of them.

And Edge has some quality guys in that 20-50 range, but not many.

On the other hand, there are several WR's that will go in that range - so the value for picking 2 makes sense.

 

[Poppa San]

As I said, given the talent distribution.

DT drops off after Wyatt, Hall, and Winfrey - so I would definitely be targetting one of them.

And Edge has some quality guys in that 20-50 range, but not many.

On the other hand, there are several WR's that will go in that range - so the value for picking 2 makes sense.

I could see the top 4 picks going to those 3 positions also S, LB, CB or anything else not ST or QB.

 

[tynimiller]

It was more the topic, didn’t mean to single you out (though i obviously did). Apologies.

No worries I found it funny not offending

 

[Pkrjones]

I be more sensitive to your plight if you were not contributing to the derailment of a number of threads yourself. Seems to me you are the on who brought up Bruce Clark in the AJ Dillon thread.

Nice try, but my Clark post was #372 in that AR $150mil thread, which had already been derailed starting at post #289. My point is: let's ALL try to keep threads on-point, please.

 

[OldSchool101]

I'm in the camp of 2 WR's in the first 4 picks though... 1 in the 1st, 1 in the 2nd.

There will be quality options in both rounds.

Also, 2 of any OT/OL, DT, Edge...
There are a couple of good Safeties in that range. No TE's, in there... the same with RB and QB. CB is always in the conversation.

Still, 2 WR's in the 1st 4 picks needs to happen given the talent distribution.

Yes. There’s also no reason not to believe 1 of 2 receivers inside of top #59 overall can’t get respectable production IF we take a pair early in.

Having a more evenly distributed ball offers some continuity if a WR goes down. Also an unpredictability factor. We were too predictable in that last Divisional contest imo.

I also wouldn’t be shocked to see a pure WR/Returner specialist selected somewhere Day 3.

Another missing Receiver is our TE. Our top #1 Offense had 230 points scored from our top 2 TE + top 2 WR targets in 2020. 84 points resulted from those 2 TE.
In 2021 , just 138 points was scored by our top 2 WR + top 2 TE targets.

Efficiency improves drastically with multiple viable Receiving targets. Just 24 points were production from Deguara and Dafney.
Had our TE production paralleled 2020. We would’ve scored a respectable 198 vs 230 pounded by that group of 4

 

[thequick12]

Just for the record, it seems Adams already told the Packers in January that he wanted to be traded.
Do you have any sources that confirm McLaurin wants to be traded or are you just making that up because you would like it to be true.

Right on I hadnt heard about the January thing. But that article about Adams calling packers brass in march just came out. Im of the opinion Adams decided before the season started 2021 would be his last in GB

By saying Washington isnt far off from finding themselves in the same situation as the packers did with Adams. I was simply meaning if he doesn't wanna play for them he can force his way out just as Adams did. Like you said next offseason...

The labor market in the world has drastically changed since the pandemic and the nfl isnt immune from that. Employees have the powerto dictate their situation more than ever

 

[sschind]

Yes. There’s also no reason not to believe 1 of 2 receivers inside of top #59 overall can’t get respectable production IF we take a pair early in.

Having a more evenly distributed ball offers some continuity if a WR goes down. Also an unpredictability factor. We were too predictable in that last Divisional contest imo.

I also wouldn’t be shocked to see a pure WR/Returner specialist selected somewhere Day 3.

Another missing Receiver is our TE. Our top #1 Offense had 230 points scored from our top 2 TE + top 2 WR targets in 2020. 84 points resulted from those 2 TE.
In 2021 , just 138 points was scored by our top 2 WR + top 2 TE targets.

Efficiency improves drastically with multiple viable Receiving targets. Just 24 points were production from Deguara and Dafney.
Had our TE production paralleled 2020. We would’ve scored a respectable 198 vs 230 pounded by that group of 4

As far as getting reasonable production from a rookie you have to look at the rest of the WRs on the team as well. Often when a rookie comes in there is a clear cut #1 WR on the team and that can limit his production. That most likely won't be the case with the Packers in 2022. I can easily see a situation where the right rookie WR can be the Packers leading receiver this year. I just wish I knew, or more accurately Gute knew which one that was.

 

[OldSchool101]

As far as getting reasonable production from a rookie you have to look at the rest of the WRs on the team as well. Often when a rookie comes in there is a clear cut #1 WR on the team and that can limit his production. That most likely won't be the case with the Packers in 2022. I can easily see a situation where the right rookie WR can be the Packers leading receiver this year. I just wish I knew, or more accurately Gute knew which one that was.

Oh certainly.
In my opinion Gute is crossing long term upside with someone more polished.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he lets Aaron have input this time around.
That would make #12 immediately vested with the selection and thus the success of a Rook WR or TE tied to Him

 

[PikeBadger]

Oh certainly.
In my opinion Gute is crossing long term upside with someone more polished.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he lets Aaron have input this time around.
That would make #12 immediately vested with the selection and thus the success of a Rook WR or TE tied to Him

Interesting scenario you painted there. It might possibly result in Rodgers throwing at a rookie. Doesn't mean it will result in greater success for the team though. Rookies are notorious for making lots of rookie mistakes which is why I think it's usually wise to limit your risk by limiting the snaps of players who are going to be handling the ball a lot.