Revisionist History: Jason LaCanfora on Packers 2020 First Round

[pbmax]

Jason La Canfora, the man responsible for such insightful pieces as Kyle Shanahan angers people and won't be successful, is now taking Packers coach Matt LaFleur to task for claiming the Packers ran out of first round value when it came time to move up for Jordan Love.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/packers-revisionist-history-why-matt-lafleurs-account-of-why-they-took-jordan-love-doesnt-add-up/

His evidence is basically who they did not trade up for and those they did not stay put to draft:

1. Packers did not move up for Kenneth Murray, a WR or a center.

2. Packers did not take Patrick Queen or Jordyn Brooks when each would have been available at 30.

He ignores some things that we know about the Packers: they almost never target WR in the first round. They almost never target ILB in the first round. They have not taken an interior OL in forever that early (Verba and Wahle were ticketed to be tackles).

The Savage Rule Exception: In my head, this rules out trading up into the low 20s for a WR or Murray as they had signed Funchess, Canadian Boyfriend, and Kirksey; so unlike the Savage pick (deep safety), there was not a starting lineup gap where literally no one capable of playing the position existed on the roster.

They wren't trading up for Ruiz even if LaCanfora underestimates the chances of Linsley being a cap casualty next year.

So where does this leave Jason's theory?

We don't know who else they contact about moving up (the only story we got was hearing Schneider talking about talking to the Packers). And we don't know who they might have been targeting.

We do know teams do not usually have 32 players with first round grades. Packers don't like taking Round 2 grades in Round 1.

How hard did they try to move up for Jefferson or Murray, if at all? No ones knows, least of all LaCanfora.

It has been reported that Gute was thinking about Lock last year, but unlike Love, he was not able to move up to get him as the Broncos jumped in front.

So did the Packers target Love all along? I doubt it. They had three more years to look in the first round for a QB for Rodgers was done.

I believe its possible Love was their last first round grade. We just don't know hard how they tried to move up for any others.

[run pMc]

Remind me again - did they trade up AFTER Aiyuk was picked? If that's the case, they were certainly going after Jordan Love. If it was not the case, you could argue they were after someone else and he was the backup plan, but no HC or GM would ever publicly admit that unless it was in a memoir published 20 years after the fact.

Agree it's uncommon for even 25 players to get a first-round grade on a team's board. If they wanted Queen or Brooks they could have taken them. They thought JL was a better pick based on whatever calculations they made.

What's the point of the article - to tell MLF to admit they picked JL to replace Rodgers at a lower cost? Isn't that obvious? Is it wrong to not overtly tell Rodgers he's on the clock and just say JL was the BPA?

It's just stirring up shit because things are boring in his corner of the web, probably at the behest of a know nothing editor.

[pbmax]

Remind me again - did they trade up AFTER Aiyuk was picked? If that's the case, they were certainly going after Jordan Love. If it was not the case, you could argue they were after someone else and he was the backup plan, but no HC or GM would ever publicly admit that unless it was in a memoir published 20 years after the fact.

Agree it's uncommon for even 25 players to get a first-round grade on a team's board. If they wanted Queen or Brooks they could have taken them. They thought JL was a better pick based on whatever calculations they made.

What's the point of the article - to tell MLF to admit they picked JL to replace Rodgers at a lower cost? Isn't that obvious? Is it wrong to not overtly tell Rodgers he's on the clock and just say JL was the BPA?

It's just stirring up shit because things are boring in his corner of the web, probably at the behest of a know nothing editor.

I have no reports to share. But its unheard of to complete a trade the day of the draft and not be certain of the choices at the pick. I don't think they were moving up to get Aiyuk.

Jason is defending his claim that the Packers made this move and are planning to move on from Rodgers in 2 years. He made that claim during or shortly after the draft. And he is trying to debunk the idea, as LaFleur put it on the radio, that the Packers were down to their last first round choice on the board.

I don't doubt the Packers realize that they are setting up a possible succession.

What Jason doesn't want to acknowledge is that by taking him now rather than in two years, the Packers have options.

He wants it to be a fait accompli that Gute is buying into the cheap rookie QB deal method of team building. The evidence on that is severely lacking.

[sharpe1027]

Classic case of a preexsting conclusion followed by attempted justification.

[Bretsky]

I have no reports to share. But its unheard of to complete a trade the day of the draft and not be certain of the choices at the pick. I don't think they were moving up to get Aiyuk.

Jason is defending his claim that the Packers made this move and are planning to move on from Rodgers in 2 years. He made that claim during or shortly after the draft. And he is trying to debunk the idea, as LaFleur put it on the radio, that the Packers were down to their last first round choice on the board.

I don't doubt the Packers realize that they are setting up a possible succession.

What Jason doesn't want to acknowledge is that by taking him now rather than in two years, the Packers have options.

He wants it to be a fait accompli that Gute is buying into the cheap rookie QB deal method of team building. The evidence on that is severely lacking.

I'm not sure I agree with this; would you try to deny that teams with QB's on either first year deals, or QB's who were willing to take below market value deals have excelled ?

[sharpe1027]

The whole "poor Packers" argument was pretty pathetic. Lafleur wasn't feeling sorry for himself. He was just explaining that Love was the best guy in their board by a good margin.

All this talk of some complex two or three year plan to move on is sounding eerily like conspiracy theorist. Too many contingencies in the draft alone to have that all planned out, much less the contingencies over the next several years.

I'm not saying Rodgers will be here in three years. Nobody knows that (which is part of my point). I'm just saying don't discount the more straight forward explanation, they had Love well above anyone else on the board. They probably looked to move up, and if they couldn't get him, they would have looked to move down

[texaspackerbacker]

I'll take the point of view of pretty much any poster in here over this know-nothing media shithead who's just in it to stir up trouble.

[wist43]

The bottom line is - this was a trademark TT/Packers draft that says fuck today, we're looking ahead to tomorrow.

It is the Packer formula for spitting on 30 straight years of HOF QB play, and only coming away with 2 Trophies.

Don't worry about filling obvious holes, just patch 'em with some junk, and maybe some of your lower round fodder will develop. If it doesn't?? No worries, they weren't worried about winning today anyway.

The organizational philosophy of not caring about LB play is still there; as is their disdain for 1st rd WR's.

I think a lot of us were hoping for a philosophically different approach with Gute, and were encouraged by his 1st 2 years, but this offseason takes us right back to the failed bullshit of the TT era.

I guess Gute is hoping he can win a Lombardi in 2026, and that will be good enough to see us thru to 2035.

[Zool]

I'm not sure I agree with this; would you try to deny that teams with QB's on either first year deals, or QB's who were willing to take below market value deals have excelled ?

For every Pat Mahomes, there's 8-10 QBs taken in the first round that suck. So yes I would argue against that being fact. I would call Mahomes, Jackson, and Watson exceptions to the Trubisky, Josh Rosen, Kizer, Paxon Lynch, Winston, Mariota, Bortels, Manzier, EJ Manuel, Gino Smith, Tannehill, Weeden. Those are just the bad first rounders for the previous 7 drafts. Just because you have a cheap QB, doesn't mean you have a good one.

[Zool]

It is the Packer formula for spitting on 30 straight years of HOF QB play, and only coming away with 2 Trophies.

This argument is old. Dan Marino won how many trophies in 17 seasons? Brees has 1 in 18 seasons. The Chargers have 0 with back to back HOF QBs over that same 18 years. There's a reason that a dynasty like the Pats, the 49ers of the 80s/90s, and the Packers of the 60s is held in such awe. It's fucking hard to win it all. You need luck as much as anything else. Maybe you should be blaming Fat Mike for blowing so many NFC championship games? How about blaming Rodgers for 2011 against the Cards? Surely it takes more than just one aspect to build a team.

Hell the Braves had 3 HOF starting pitchers on their roster for 8 consecutive years and barely won one World Series. If there was a magic formula, then everyone would do it.

[Bretsky]

For every Pat Mahomes, there's 8-10 QBs taken in the first round that suck. So yes I would argue against that being fact. I would call Mahomes, Jackson, and Watson exceptions to the Trubisky, Josh Rosen, Kizer, Paxon Lynch, Winston, Mariota, Bortels, Manzier, EJ Manuel, Gino Smith, Tannehill, Weeden. Those are just the bad first rounders for the previous 7 drafts. Just because you have a cheap QB, doesn't mean you have a good one.

You missed the point I was disagreeing with pb on.

get some work and some don't.

A common theme in the NFL is many feel like the way to win is draft an outstanding QB, get him playing right away, and win a SB during his first five years when you can stock load talent around him. See Russell Wilson. See Patrick Mahommes. See Nick Foles...OK...he was the cheap backup when they had a cheap starter on his first contract....and used their cap money to surround him with talent. See Tom Brady, grossly underpaid for many years on the cap purposely to allow NE to surround with elite talent. If Brady was getting paid market value, how many less Super Bowls would the Pats have won ?

Dallas window is about to close. They are going to grossly overpay Dak and have about 3 guys taking up over 50% of their cap space.

I have been saying forever, I like Jordan Love but we reached for him by giving up the ability to get our WR in round two, and more importantly we drafted him two years early to screw up trying to get one more SB while you have a QB on a rookie deal.

[wist43]

This argument is old. Dan Marino won how many trophies in 17 seasons? Brees has 1 in 18 seasons. The Chargers have 0 with back to back HOF QBs over that same 18 years. There's a reason that a dynasty like the Pats, the 49ers of the 80s/90s, and the Packers of the 60s is held in such awe. It's fucking hard to win it all. You need luck as much as anything else. Maybe you should be blaming Fat Mike for blowing so many NFC championship games? How about blaming Rodgers for 2011 against the Cards? Surely it takes more than just one aspect to build a team.

Hell the Braves had 3 HOF starting pitchers on their roster for 8 consecutive years and barely won one World Series. If there was a magic formula, then everyone would do it.

You're making my argument for me... build the team, fill out the roster.

Having a HOF QB should make a GM's job easier.

And I do blame Fat Mike for blowing the Seattle game. The rest is on TT. The philosophy is flawed in terms of winning championships. TT's philosophy settles you into being 10-6 in perpetuity. Sub .500 without the HOF QB.

2011 was a fart in the wind, and the year we came close against Seattle was b/c TT departed from his turtle approach long enough to sign a couple FA's.

One bad offseason isn't enough for me to completely sour on Gute. I'm still holding out some hope; but, he damn sure made a mess of this offseason. No getting around that.

[call_me_ishmael]

The fact that the coach is already seemingly trying to hedge his bets or pretend this was something other than what the entire league saw … is probably not a good sign. You had the conviction – albeit, in the eyes of many, misguided conviction – to grab a QB you are banking on being a more cost-effective replacement for Rodgers come 2022.
Wear it. Embrace it. And by all means, sell it. If you can't, no one can.

They should own it, I agree. Just say it. This is the guy. We are hoping he turns out to be a good player.

[sharpe1027]

Never has so much certainty and value been placed on a late first round pick than in here. If only they had picked one of the remaining WRs, we'd have a chance at a Superbowl. Now that they didn't, no chance. Itt amazing how valuable this pick was! Franchise changing!

News flash, the chances of it making a lick of difference this year were long. Why is everyone so bent out of shape for one late first rounder?

[Zool]

Never has so much certainty and value been placed on a late first round pick than in here. If only they had picked one of the remaining WRs, we'd have a chance at a Superbowl. Now that they didn't, no chance. Itt amazing how valuable this pick was! Franchise changing!

News flash, the chances of it making a lick of difference this year were long. Why is everyone so bent out of shape for one late first rounder?

One game away last year and the only loss is Bulaga. They are going to lose 9 games this year because rookie WRs typically are pro bowlers. If only they had taken a shot on a prospect with a 50/50 shot to even be worthy of an NFL roster spot.