Packers WR's vs Other Teams

[Zool]

Re: Packers WR's vs Other Teams

Holiday and Ruvell are as good as almost every 2nd WR on all the other teams I didn't mention.

You REALLY lost me here.

Yeah, ouch. I'm a big fan of Carlyle and My Favorite Martin, but this is way over the top. Also I think I might just throw the Bengals in there? They seem to be OK at WR. Maybe Dallas too, even though TO is an asshat.

In case anyone is wondering, Ashley Lelie and Arnaz Battle are listed 1-2 for the 49ers. Do you think their fans wanted a WR in the draft?

[The Leaper]

What happened to Jennings last year is typical of rookie WR's in the NFL. His body didn't hold up to the rigors of the NFL schedule. The Packers have had him on an off-season conditioning program to correct that. When Jennings was healthy however, he was quite good, and more of a playmaker than most of us thought. There is little reason to think he can't manage 55-70 catches this season, which would put him in solid #2 territory.

I would mostly agree with that.

However, I'm not sure I see Jennings as a playmaker. He did have one big play against Detroit...but that was more about Driver's incredible blocking than Jenning's playmaking capacity. Take away that one 75 yard TD catch...and Jennings had 44 catches (12.7 avg) and 2 TDs. I could care less about the number of catches. Nearly ANYONE can get 50-70 catches in a full season at Green Bay when Favre is throwing 550+ passes in a season.

Granted, I like Jennings. I think he has a future as a starter in the NFL. I just don't think he can be considered a reliable starter yet. In a perfect world, he'd still be a #3 WR for one more year...and we'd have a capable veteran as our #2 for 2007.

[The Leaper]

Re: Packers WR's vs Other Teams

In case anyone is wondering, Ashley Lelie and Arnaz Battle are listed 1-2 for the 49ers. Do you think their fans wanted a WR in the draft?

Well, they do have a pretty good young TE prospect in V Davis. They also have a battle ram for a RB who is a reliable playmaker. They certainly could use some help at WR though. That would be one of the few teams that I would easily balk at trading WRs with.

[Packgator]

Re: Packers WR's vs Other Teams

What NFC teams would you make that deal with? (Packers top 5 WR's straight up for theirs with no salary cap considerations).

Why stop there.......

What teams in the entire league would you make that deal with?

This time of year you have to project the top five. But all the talk makes it sound like the Packers would love to have what most teams already have. The reality may actually be quite different.

I would trade top 5 WRs with nearly ANY team in the NFL

I don't have time to go 5 deep on every roster and break it down...but I would guess that there are at least 24 of 32 teams that I would trade straight up for

The 4th and 5th receivers would be a small part when considering such a deal. You are saying you would make the trade with "at least" 24 teams right now. Well lets look at just the NFC........

Tampa.............NO
Atlanta.............NO
New Orleans......NO
Carolina............NO (???)

Dallas...............NO (???)
Giants...............NO
Philly................NO
Wash................NO (???)

Chicago.............NO
Minn.................NO
Detroit..............YES

San Fran...........NO
Seattle.............NO
Arizona.............YES
St. Louis...........?? (???)

There are 9 NO's (maybe 13) right there and it's only half the league. Which of the NO's above would you trade with 5 for 5 right now if you had to make the deal today?

[Packgator]

Truthfully there are a LOT of team that are in better shape than the Packers.

Lions - Calvin Johnson, Roy Williams, Mike Furrey
Cardinals - Anquan Boldin, Larry Fitzgerald, Bryant Johnson


Which would you rather have? Really, does the 4th & 5th WR make that much difference? Seems that the top 3 are really the ones that matter.

That is two teams that I think everyone would agree with. But a lot? That's kind of my point. Everyone automatically thinks the Packers are weak at WR. When you start to look at each team there aren't a lot you would trade even up 5 for 5 right now. Or are there?

[BallHawk]

You bring up a great point PackGator. Definitely I would like AZ or DET, but outside of that I don't see any team that makes me really want to say "Man, I wish I had them."

So does this mean we have, arguably, a top 10 receiving core?

[The Leaper]

That is two teams that I think everyone would agree with. But a lot? That's kind of my point. Everyone automatically thinks the Packers are weak at WR. When you start to look at each team there aren't a lot you would trade even up 5 for 5 right now. Or are there?

It is a good question, but one that would take hours to research. In other words, your question isn't likely to get an logical answer anytime soon.

If I were looking at the Packers, I would say this is the value to assign to current players (10 being CFL caliber, 30 being borderline NFL caliber, 50 being average NFL caliber, 70 being reliable NFL starting caliber, 90 being Pro Bowl caliber)

Driver 85/50=135 - he's an elite WR now, but has only average future potential due to his age.
Jennings 55/70=125 - he's slightly better than average now, and has a solid potential going forward.
Ferguson 40/40=80 - yuck.
Jones (rookie)/60 - gets a 60 potential rating based on draft position, impossible to quantify current ability.
Clowney (rookie)/50 - gets a 50 potential rating based on draft position, impossible to quantify current ability.

I can do this in 5 minutes with Green Bay because I follow them closely. I can probably also do it rather quickly for other NFC North teams and several other elite AFC/NFC teams. Other than that, it would take 15-20 minutes a team to break everything down.

You probably also need to throw the top TE in there as well...since having a great TE can allow a team to maintain a lesser group of WRs. That's another yuck spot for Green Bay.

[4and12to12and4]

Re: Packers WR's vs Other Teams

What NFC teams would you make that deal with? (Packers top 5 WR's straight up for theirs with no salary cap considerations).

Why stop there.......

What teams in the entire league would you make that deal with?

This time of year you have to project the top five. But all the talk makes it sound like the Packers would love to have what most teams already have. The reality may actually be quite different.

I would trade top 5 WRs with nearly ANY team in the NFL

I don't have time to go 5 deep on every roster and break it down...but I would guess that there are at least 24 of 32 teams that I would trade straight up for

The 4th and 5th receivers would be a small part when considering such a deal. You are saying you would make the trade with "at least" 24 teams right now. Well lets look at just the NFC........

Tampa.............NO
Atlanta.............NO
New Orleans......NO
Carolina............NO (???)

Dallas...............NO (???)
Giants...............NO
Philly................NO
Wash................NO (???)

Chicago.............NO
Minn.................NO
Detroit..............YES

San Fran...........NO
Seattle.............NO
Arizona.............YES
St. Louis...........?? (???)

There are 9 NO's (maybe 13) right there and it's only half the league. Which of the NO's above would you trade with 5 for 5 right now if you had to make the deal today?

Thank you. Most accurate post in this thread. Those who claim i'm way off that Ruvell and Holiday could be MANY NFL's 2nd receiver, other than about 7 teams, that is accurate. I did forget about the Bengals. But, Dallas? TO had a worse year than DD, and glenn is good, but aging, I'd rather have Jenning, Holiday, or Ruvell than him. Ruvell and Holiday are underestimated by most of you. They will, if healthy, prove you all wrong this year. They have great hands, and quickness, and Holiday has the ability to go deep and fight for the ball like Javon used to do. You'll see, if healthy, the problem MM will have at the end of preseason will be who to cut. Guaranteed.

[Charles Woodson]

Re: Packers WR's vs Other Teams

What NFC teams would you make that deal with? (Packers top 5 WR's straight up for theirs with no salary cap considerations).

Why stop there.......

What teams in the entire league would you make that deal with?

This time of year you have to project the top five. But all the talk makes it sound like the Packers would love to have what most teams already have. The reality may actually be quite different.

I would trade top 5 WRs with nearly ANY team in the NFL

I don't have time to go 5 deep on every roster and break it down...but I would guess that there are at least 24 of 32 teams that I would trade straight up for

The 4th and 5th receivers would be a small part when considering such a deal. You are saying you would make the trade with "at least" 24 teams right now. Well lets look at just the NFC........

Tampa.............NO
Atlanta.............NO
New Orleans......NO
Carolina............NO (???)

Dallas...............NO (???)
Giants...............NO
Philly................NO
Wash................NO (???)

Chicago.............NO
Minn.................NO
Detroit..............YES

San Fran...........NO
Seattle.............NO
Arizona.............YES
St. Louis...........?? (???)

There are 9 NO's (maybe 13) right there and it's only half the league. Which of the NO's above would you trade with 5 for 5 right now if you had to make the deal today?

Thank you. Most accurate post in this thread. Those who claim i'm way off that Ruvell and Holiday could be MANY NFL's 2nd receiver, other than about 7 teams, that is accurate. I did forget about the Bengals. But, Dallas? TO had a worse year than DD, and glenn is good, but aging, I'd rather have Jenning, Holiday, or Ruvell than him. Ruvell and Holiday are underestimated by most of you. They will, if healthy, prove you all wrong this year. They have great hands, and quickness, and Holiday has the ability to go deep and fight for the ball like Javon used to do. You'll see, if healthy, the problem MM will have at the end of preseason will be who to cut. Guaranteed.

I am a big fan of ruvell and holiday but i belive your still wrong when you say they would be a 2nd receiver for many teams, in the nfc the only teams i belive they could do that in are
Falcons eagles bucs 49ers

[Bretsky]

Well, to be fair, none of the WRs after those two have shown they can even be a good #3 receiver yet. Also, Jennings got injured last year, so at this point we don't know if he's injury prone or it was a fluke thing. Also, the TEs stink and the RBs are a question mark. I can see why people think that the Packers are weak at the skill positions. They have one guy (Donald Driver) who is close to being a guaranteed stud. Still, there is talent at RB and WR, so not all hope is lost.

[Bretsky]

It really hinges on how Jennings does this year, and whether Jones can learn enough to be an effective #3. If Jennings stays healthy and develops, and Jones can learn enough to play the #3 spot, then the Packers will be in reasonable shape. I wouldn't swap receivers with either the Queens or the Bears. But the Lions....well, I'd hate to give up DD, but Johnson and Williams, two young guys, would be tempting.

If If If

Truth be told if you cut out the ifs GB's receiving core would probably be in the bottom half of the NFL if you go #1-#4

[Bretsky]

Re: Packers WR's vs Other Teams

What NFC teams would you make that deal with? (Packers top 5 WR's straight up for theirs with no salary cap considerations).

Why stop there.......

What teams in the entire league would you make that deal with?

This time of year you have to project the top five. But all the talk makes it sound like the Packers would love to have what most teams already have. The reality may actually be quite different.

I would trade top 5 WRs with nearly ANY team in the NFL.

Let's be real here. Driver is fabulous, but is getting to the point where age will have a negative effect. He has 2-3 good years left. Jennings is a solid prospect, but he's not a playmaker. No one else on the roster has proven anything on the field yet.

I don't have time to go 5 deep on every roster and break it down...but I would guess that there are at least 24 of 32 teams that I would trade straight up for, and the only reason the number isn't higher is Driver. Take the #1 WR out of the equation, and Green Bay may have the most unproven group of WRs in the NFL.

That doesn't mean they will turn out to be crap. I'm hoping Jones and Clowney become studs. I'm not going to bet on it though.

[Bretsky]

""""Holiday and Ruvell are as good as almost every 2nd WR""""




If those guys are starters then this team has absolutely no weaknesses.
Both have marginal NFL talent; Ted Thompson I'm sure would agree or he wouldn't have drafted a WR in round 3 and 5.

[Bretsky]

Re: Packers WR's vs Other Teams

What NFC teams would you make that deal with? (Packers top 5 WR's straight up for theirs with no salary cap considerations).

Why stop there.......

What teams in the entire league would you make that deal with?

This time of year you have to project the top five. But all the talk makes it sound like the Packers would love to have what most teams already have. The reality may actually be quite different.

I would trade top 5 WRs with nearly ANY team in the NFL

I don't have time to go 5 deep on every roster and break it down...but I would guess that there are at least 24 of 32 teams that I would trade straight up for

The 4th and 5th receivers would be a small part when considering such a deal. You are saying you would make the trade with "at least" 24 teams right now. Well lets look at just the NFC........

Tampa.............NO
Atlanta.............NO
New Orleans......NO
Carolina............NO (???)

Dallas...............NO (???)
Giants...............NO
Philly................NO
Wash................NO (???)

Chicago.............NO
Minn.................NO
Detroit..............YES

San Fran...........NO
Seattle.............NO
Arizona.............YES
St. Louis...........?? (???)

There are 9 NO's (maybe 13) right there and it's only half the league. Which of the NO's above would you trade with 5 for 5 right now if you had to make the deal today?

Thank you. Most accurate post in this thread. Those who claim i'm way off that Ruvell and Holiday could be MANY NFL's 2nd receiver, other than about 7 teams, that is accurate. I did forget about the Bengals. But, Dallas? TO had a worse year than DD, and glenn is good, but aging, I'd rather have Jenning, Holiday, or Ruvell than him. Ruvell and Holiday are underestimated by most of you. They will, if healthy, prove you all wrong this year. They have great hands, and quickness, and Holiday has the ability to go deep and fight for the ball like Javon used to do. You'll see, if healthy, the problem MM will have at the end of preseason will be who to cut. Guaranteed.

Nuts

Why don't you name the #2 WR's in the NFL Ruvell Martin is better than

[RashanGary]

Jennings injury was pretty much a fluke IMO. Taht is a very unusual way to get tied up. He'll be fine. We do need guys to step up though, Driver isn't going ot be around forever.

As far as worries go for me it's

RB
SS
OG *I don't know for certain 2 guys will step up*
#3 CB *Woodson and Harris are getting old*
Backup RB
#3 WR

It's exaggerated by the media IMO.