2021 Packers News, Trades, Transactions - Sternberger Released

[Matches Malone]

Stinks for him, but also happy someone like Winfree or Taylor might have a shot at the roster now.

[PintSizedBox10]

There are analytical models which state that ILBs are the least valuable position on a defense. The Packers clearly buy into that notion, because they've invested nothing in that position over the last 15 years.

We took an RB in the 2nd round last year - clearly analytics weren't considered then.

I mean every gm in the league has at least one or two positional groups they choose not to really invest in because they think they can make due in other areas and it's impossible to invest heavily into every position group on the team.

Yes they've decided to invest in RB in recent years and whether that's a good idea or whether they'd be better served to have used that capital elsewhere is open for debate. It would seem though that this offense is RB heavy which is why they've chosen to do it.

The better question for people to ask regarding ILB would be would you have rather had them invest heavily in ILB or the secondary and/or OLB and even with or without those two groups invested in I'd still argue DL should still be prioritized over ILB.

Point that I'm making is though that you have to pick and choose where to invest and then after that hope you find possible stop gaps at the lesser valued groups.



Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Past results say the Packers may want to rethink their approach to building a defense.

Sent from my SM-G981U using RealGM mobile app

[Treebeard]

I'm assuming Adams, Cobb, Lazard, MVS, Rogers as the locks. ESB? Taylor has looked good, and Begelton has looked useful and adaptable too. Winfree got a lot of positive press till injuries sidelined him.

Who stays out of that second bunch?

[RRyder823]

We took an RB in the 2nd round last year - clearly analytics weren't considered then.

I mean every gm in the league has at least one or two positional groups they choose not to really invest in because they think they can make due in other areas and it's impossible to invest heavily into every position group on the team.

Yes they've decided to invest in RB in recent years and whether that's a good idea or whether they'd be better served to have used that capital elsewhere is open for debate. It would seem though that this offense is RB heavy which is why they've chosen to do it.

The better question for people to ask regarding ILB would be would you have rather had them invest heavily in ILB or the secondary and/or OLB and even with or without those two groups invested in I'd still argue DL should still be prioritized over ILB.

Point that I'm making is though that you have to pick and choose where to invest and then after that hope you find possible stop gaps at the lesser valued groups.



Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Past results say the Packers may want to rethink their approach to building a defense.

Sent from my SM-G981U using RealGM mobile app

Ok. So which positional group should they start valuing less in favor of ILB?

Funny thing is I agree they should of built the defense differently with more investment on the dline versus the secondary but that's still not saying they shouldn't be prioritized ILB over either

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

[TroyD92]

Hopefully Winfree can get on the field.

[ReginaldDwight]

Remember when i said to cut that fool, looks like it woulda been the right call.

[Finn]

He was placed on IR due to injury, not cut because of a poor choice of words. So wrong call.

[MickeyDavis]

Read on Twitter

[MickeyDavis]

Read on Twitter

[HKPackFan]

He was placed on IR due to injury, not cut because of a poor choice of words. So wrong call.

So this is not the return later kind of IR... This is the season long he's done for the year IR right?

[Ryan5UW]

He was placed on IR due to injury, not cut because of a poor choice of words. So wrong call.

So this is not the return later kind of IR... This is the season long he's done for the year IR right?

If I remember correctly you have to make the 53 man roster before going on IR in order to be able to return during the year.

[crkone]

He was placed on IR due to injury, not cut because of a poor choice of words. So wrong call.

So this is not the return later kind of IR... This is the season long he's done for the year IR right?

If I remember correctly you have to make the 53 man roster before going on IR in order to be able to return during the year.

Yep. They'll probably determine that after this next game to see if one of the other 97 receivers gets injured.

[CWoodfan]

We took an RB in the 2nd round last year - clearly analytics weren't considered then.

I mean every gm in the league has at least one or two positional groups they choose not to really invest in because they think they can make due in other areas and it's impossible to invest heavily into every position group on the team.

Yes they've decided to invest in RB in recent years and whether that's a good idea or whether they'd be better served to have used that capital elsewhere is open for debate. It would seem though that this offense is RB heavy which is why they've chosen to do it.

The better question for people to ask regarding ILB would be would you have rather had them invest heavily in ILB or the secondary and/or OLB and even with or without those two groups invested in I'd still argue DL should still be prioritized over ILB.

Point that I'm making is though that you have to pick and choose where to invest and then after that hope you find possible stop gaps at the lesser valued groups.



Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Past results say the Packers may want to rethink their approach to building a defense.

Sent from my SM-G981U using RealGM mobile app

Yep.

Such a tough call on whether the idiotic Packers defensive philosophy or the sharty drafting/personnel decisions have been more responsible for GB trotting out mediocre to sharty defenses for a decade now.

As much as I despise spending so many draft resources, over and over again, on the back end of the D and think the neglecting of the inside linebacker position has been borderline crazy, I'd say the sharty drafting is where most of the blame lies. And I don't believe anyone picked after round 3 should really be considered (not even top of the 4th round selection Vince Biegel) a miss.

I mean, how many teams could survive the following run:

2014 HaHa Round 1
2015 Randall Round 1 (when many a Packer fan preferred Eric Kendricks to fill the even then annual hole in the middle of the D)
2015 Rollins Round 2
2017 King Round 2
2017 J. Jones Round 2
2018 J. Jackson Round 2

What an unbelievable amount of draft capital spent (more like wasted) on the back end.

Of course, taking a 4-3 DE and pretending he could play 3-4 OLB (Perry Round 1), a gap shooting nobody (Worthy Round 2), an all-world (in his mind) tweener (Datone Jones Round 1), a nobody who never was (Khyri Thornton Round 3), and a flyer on a Tarzan (Montravious Adams Round 3) doesn't exactly indicate that had they expended more draft resources along the defensive front it would have led to more defensive success.

I note that most of these busts were selected before Gutey assumed the GM role.

Anyway, one thing we know for sure is that even when the Pack used a round 1-3 pick on an inside linebacker over the past decade they still failed miserably (Burks).

[sdn40]

Remember that when draft day rolls around and fans are screaming for WR's and gadget guys. As I've said, 89% of Super Bowl participants are Top 10 in Scoring Defense. The last time GB had one ?? 2010. Look at how many Super Bowls the Giants won with what looked like the most pedestrian teams ever. One of those teams (lead by their DL) took out the 15-1 Packers. Tampa won the Super Bowl because of their DL, not Tom Brady. How good were Craig Newsome and Doug Evans ?? Who the hell knows, because the DL was elite. Fix the defense or nothing else matters continues to be my mantra.

[ReasonablySober]

Remember that when draft day rolls around and fans are screaming for WR's and gadget guys. As I've said, 89% of Super Bowl participants are Top 10 in Scoring Defense. The last time GB had one ?? 2010. Look at how many Super Bowls the Giants won with what looked like the most pedestrian teams ever. One of those teams (lead by their DL) took out the 15-1 Packers. Tampa won the Super Bowl because of their DL, not Tom Brady. How good were Craig Newsome and Doug Evans ?? Who the hell knows, because the DL was elite. Fix the defense or nothing else matters continues to be my mantra.

KC not having an offensive line kinda hurt their chances.

[WeekapaugGroove]

I mean every gm in the league has at least one or two positional groups they choose not to really invest in because they think they can make due in other areas and it's impossible to invest heavily into every position group on the team.

Yes they've decided to invest in RB in recent years and whether that's a good idea or whether they'd be better served to have used that capital elsewhere is open for debate. It would seem though that this offense is RB heavy which is why they've chosen to do it.

The better question for people to ask regarding ILB would be would you have rather had them invest heavily in ILB or the secondary and/or OLB and even with or without those two groups invested in I'd still argue DL should still be prioritized over ILB.

Point that I'm making is though that you have to pick and choose where to invest and then after that hope you find possible stop gaps at the lesser valued groups.



Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Past results say the Packers may want to rethink their approach to building a defense.

Sent from my SM-G981U using RealGM mobile app

Yep.

Such a tough call on whether the idiotic Packers defensive philosophy or the sharty drafting/personnel decisions have been more responsible for GB trotting out mediocre to sharty defenses for a decade now.

As much as I despise spending so many draft resources, over and over again, on the back end of the D and think the neglecting of the inside linebacker position has been borderline crazy, I'd say the sharty drafting is where most of the blame lies. And I don't believe anyone picked after round 3 should really be considered (not even top of the 4th round selection Vince Biegel) a miss.

I mean, how many teams could survive the following run:

2014 HaHa Round 1
2015 Randall Round 1 (when many a Packer fan preferred Eric Kendricks to fill the even then annual hole in the middle of the D)
2015 Rollins Round 2
2017 King Round 2
2017 J. Jones Round 2
2018 J. Jackson Round 2

What an unbelievable amount of draft capital spent (more like wasted) on the back end.

Of course, taking a 4-3 DE and pretending he could play 3-4 OLB (Perry Round 1), a gap shooting nobody (Worthy Round 2), an all-world (in his mind) tweener (Datone Jones Round 1), a nobody who never was (Khyri Thornton Round 3), and a flyer on a Tarzan (Montravious Adams Round 3) doesn't exactly indicate that had they expended more draft resources along the defensive front it would have led to more defensive success.

I note that most of these busts were selected before Gutey assumed the GM role.

Anyway, one thing we know for sure is that even when the Pack used a round 1-3 pick on an inside linebacker over the past decade they still failed miserably (Burks).

The failed picks in the secondary were really killer. The strategy of using the picks on the backend in today's NFL is sound but if you draft guys who can't play strategy doesn't matter. The failures compounded because they ended up having to keep going to the well while former high DB picks were still on rookie deals.

The only saving grace is the did land Alexander who if you did a redraft probably goes top 5 that year. So they regained some value there. They also got Savage who has been a little up and down but seemed to be coming on late last year so hopefully we see a leap this season.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

[ReasonablySober]

People should also remember all that draft failure when they're screaming about how we need to be drafting defenders instead of WRs and gadget guys, as if investing draft high capital ensures success.

[Treebeard]

People should also remember all that draft failure when they're screaming about how we need to be drafting defenders instead of WRs and gadget guys, as if investing draft high capital ensures success.

Of course the draft carries no guarantee, but the Pack has whiffed or under-performed too often on earlier round defensive picks

[ReasonablySober]

Read on Twitter

[sdn40]

People should also remember all that draft failure when they're screaming about how we need to be drafting defenders instead of WRs and gadget guys, as if investing draft high capital ensures success.

Now that's awesome logic. Sorry fans, even though 89% of Super Bowl participants have a Top 10 Scoring defense, we suck at drafting defensive guys so you'll just have to get used to us getting smoked every year.