Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 166 to 174 of 174
  1. #166
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    7,452
    I disagree, but I don't think there is a traditional #2 or #3 concept which we are going to run with. The fact Funchess and Lazard isn't an issue Green Bay has often schemed 2-3 of the same skill set guys, it's just what we do and do pretty well. Funchess doesn't steal looks from Lazard if anyone who should be worried is MVS. If anything it signals they may be exploring moving on from or putting pressure on MVS or St. Brown. We often run a three WR set. Instead of Geronimo, you're plugging Funchess in. They add a crafty guy like Shenault in the draft this offense is a lot more interesting.

    Funchess isn't here to be "the guy" but he has the potential to be a big difference-maker as well. Funchess is an upgrade over all but two receivers from last season. Funchess is here also so were don't have to rely on the on MVS, St. Brown, and Kumerow while a rookie receiver or two to develop and in the process hopefully reach close his potential. I'm pretty sure the plan is to have Adams-Funchess/Lazard-top WR draft pick. Funchess and Lazard can play the big slot. Funchess can be moves around as our other two receivers can to exploit mismatches. This offense has a number of versatile players. Jace likely plays the TE/FB role as well. Funchess can also run a number of the routes which Jimmy Graham played. I think there is more to this Funchess signing than most are seeing and don't think we saw the full scheme last season.

    I keep seeing ILB, but the ILB I see them adding is likely a mid-late rounder who at best has similar limitations to Blake Martinez if we're lucky. They are taking a risk doing so, but it really looks like the plan is Kirksey-Burks. Realistically unless Queen or Murray fall in out laps who can you say in this draft fixes that? Brooks, Harrison, and Dye are a huge drop off from the top 3. If you can get Brooks, Harrison, or Dye who could be "solid starters" your maybe ready, that's a big if. But you now run the risk do you reach for any of these guys I grade them as 3rd rounders. Harrison is really a 4-3 SAM linebacker, so not really much to read on him. No matter where you take ILB depth they likely a little rough in year 1 unless you get one of the big 3. Once you get outside of Brooks and Dye there is little separation in the talent pool. Unless they can find a crafty vet deal like convincing Matthews to play ILB on the cheap, we're not going to see much change there.

    In terms of DL, you could likely get a solid guy in round 2-4 in this draft. I think Kingsley Keke will also be a factor this season, wasn't on the field much, but he showed some flashes. Unless they get lucky and Blacklock or Gallimore falls in their lap. I don't know if there are any potential free-agent bargains out there.
    Last edited by IRNMN; 03-26-2020 at 01:43 PM.

  2. #167
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,767
    But 2 or 3 of the same skillet guys were guys like jordy, jones and Adams, who were all really good all around guys. That's not lazard and funchess. If anything, they are closer to sternberger in skillet than great all around guys. If we go back to his last healthy season, it's hard to find anything he graded out well in.

    Player profiler.com does some work with channeling production into percentiles in comparison to other guys at your position. And funchess was flat out bad. He had the most drops and the highest drop rate. His qb play wasn't good, but even when you take that out, he really wasn't good. He gets virtually no YAC. His average depth of target was solid, but his efficiency ranks were usually in the 90s, as in 90 or so other wr's ranked better. He ranks poorly in seperation. And his contested catch rate isn't all that great. He makes some great ones, but also drops a ton.

    And that's where my trepidation is. Allison was bad at almost all of that too. He dropped a ton of balls last year. He doesn't get much seperation either. But I don't think funchess is a massive upgrade.

    We **** on mvs all the time for being inconsistent and unreliable. But funchess has similar problems. I saw a stat that since 2015, funchess has the 5th worst catch rate for targets. Some of that is on cam being inconsistent. But over that large of sample size, that's on funchess too. Plenty of guys have to endure bad qb play too. And for a guy with a low catch rate, you better be electric with the ball and funchess is not at all.

    Funchess has a role in the nfl. Indy made a ton of sense for him last year. Hilton is a deep threat. They drafted Campbell, who's a versatile chess piece type. Having a big body like funchess compliments that. But for us, he's redundant. Unless he shows something he hasn't shown in the past, having him on the field is a pretty minor upgrade if it's any upgrade at all. If we were going to build a cheap wr staff, I'd rather focus on guys who bring stuff we don't have.

    Assuming this is a pretty small $3 mill or less type of contract, it's fine. But to me, it's more of a depth/injury insurance type move. That being said, pending results of the draft, I'm not 100% certain he even makes the team. If we draft 2 rookies and 1 of them is higher than funchess on the depth chart, there's a real chance he's released.

  3. #168
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,767
    Well find out on ILB on draft day I guess. I just can't imagine they really think Burks is the answer. They acquired Goodson right at the end of camp last year and Burks still couldn't get on the field over him. And with kirksey's injury history, we are looking at summers or Bolton as playing significant stats. Bolton looked good last preseason, but Im not sure we really want to rely on a UDFA coming off an injury to be 1 injury (to a very injury prone player) away from becoming a starter.

    I like kirksey. But seeing as he's played 9 of 32, I don't see how that can be our only move.

    I like Keke as well. He showed some flashes. But he was billed as more of a pass rusher than a run stuffer and run stuffing is what we need. Keke deserves more snaps but he's probably not the solution to our biggest problem.

  4. #169
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    7,452
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    Assuming this is a pretty small $3 mill or less type of contract, it's fine. But to me, it's more of a depth/injury insurance type move. That being said, pending results of the draft, I'm not 100% certain he even makes the team. If we draft 2 rookies and 1 of them is higher than funchess on the depth chart, there's a real chance he's released.
    I think you hit it on the most on this right here, Funchess is insurance with upside which is why makes a ton of sense assuming they draft is most are assuming. If he's close to the 2017-18 player he's going to be of value. It's a smart move though because we don't know how the draft will work out. There's a chance you could see a guy like Tyler Johnson fall into the forth who in the 4th would be a must take, speaking of the Johnson's in this draft, if Colin Johnson is floating around I would take him easily and you essentially. But if the draft doesn't flow as a lot of us are projecting and the WR class isn't taken progressively, and more rapidly because it's a deep class, Funchess also makes sense because you don't have to take 2 WR's. Other needs open up if this happens to because other positions may fall.

    Well find out on ILB on draft day I guess. I just can't imagine they really think Burks is the answer. They acquired Goodson right at the end of camp last year and Burks still couldn't get on the field over him. And with kirksey's injury history, we are looking at summers or Bolton as playing significant stats. Bolton looked good last preseason, but Im not sure we really want to rely on a UDFA coming off an injury to be 1 injury (to a very injury prone player) away from becoming a starter.

    I like kirksey. But seeing as he's played 9 of 32, I don't see how that can be our only move.

    I like Keke as well. He showed some flashes. But he was billed as more of a pass rusher than a run stuffer and run stuffing is what we need. Keke deserves more snaps but he's probably not the solution to our biggest problem.
    I don't think they see Burks as a long term solution, but not a lot of other options out there. Given their options I may have pursued Kwiatowski a little more than Kirksey, but with ILB someone serviceable always becomes available. I think there is just few promising options via the draft. Given where Dye and Brooks. Right after them comes the jump, but a guy like Evan Weaver is basically Blake Martinez at a lower price tag, which is fine, but doesn't change a whole lot at ILB. There are a lot of "plain" or "vanilla" ILB's in this class.

    I'm hoping a guy like Leki Fotu falls to us, you pair him on one side with Keke, that's a nice rotation, on the other you have Lowry on the other side paired with Lancaster. I honesltly, think too we are going to be able to add a long term option on the DL or at ILB, which will not fix the whole issue, but it will get us closer.

  5. #170
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,767
    Quote Originally Posted by IRNMN View Post
    I think you hit it on the most on this right here, Funchess is insurance with upside which is why makes a ton of sense assuming they draft is most are assuming. If he's close to the 2017-18 player he's going to be of value. It's a smart move though because we don't know how the draft will work out. There's a chance you could see a guy like Tyler Johnson fall into the forth who in the 4th would be a must take, speaking of the Johnson's in this draft, if Colin Johnson is floating around I would take him easily and you essentially. But if the draft doesn't flow as a lot of us are projecting and the WR class isn't taken progressively, and more rapidly because it's a deep class, Funchess also makes sense because you don't have to take 2 WR's. Other needs open up if this happens to because other positions may fall.



    I don't think they see Burks as a long term solution, but not a lot of other options out there. Given their options I may have pursued Kwiatowski a little more than Kirksey, but with ILB someone serviceable always becomes available. I think there is just few promising options via the draft. Given where Dye and Brooks. Right after them comes the jump, but a guy like Evan Weaver is basically Blake Martinez at a lower price tag, which is fine, but doesn't change a whole lot at ILB. There are a lot of "plain" or "vanilla" ILB's in this class.

    I'm hoping a guy like Leki Fotu falls to us, you pair him on one side with Keke, that's a nice rotation, on the other you have Lowry on the other side paired with Lancaster. I honesltly, think too we are going to be able to add a long term option on the DL or at ILB, which will not fix the whole issue, but it will get us closer.
    I guess that's where I don't see it with funchess though. To me he isn't a depth option with upside. He's just a downside mitigation. Even if we take 1 wr, I think there's a real chance he could be gone.

    Even his "good" year wasn't that good. it was the product of being force fed targets. Since that year, only two guys have gotten as many targets as funchess and caught few balls. That was Corey Davis as a rookie. Davis had about 40 more yards but fewer tds. The other was Kenny Golladay, who had 300 more yards on 1 less catch.

    I honestly think if you forced those targets to lazard or EQ, they would have been just as productive. That's why to me it's more of a kumerow prevention strategy than real upside.

  6. #171
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    7,452
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    I guess that's where I don't see it with funchess though. To me he isn't a depth option with upside. He's just a downside mitigation. Even if we take 1 wr, I think there's a real chance he could be gone.

    Even his "good" year wasn't that good. it was the product of being force fed targets. Since that year, only two guys have gotten as many targets as funchess and caught few balls. That was Corey Davis as a rookie. Davis had about 40 more yards but fewer tds. The other was Kenny Golladay, who had 300 more yards on 1 less catch.

    I honestly think if you forced those targets to lazard or EQ, they would have been just as productive. That's why to me it's more of a kumerow prevention strategy than real upside.
    Ehhh, that's debatable. Below are a few players in their first 100+ target season.

    Player A: 119 targets, 67 catches, 784 yards, 6 TD's
    Player B: 111 targets, 63 catches, 840 yards, 8 TD's
    Player C: 107 targets, 56 catches, 933 yards, 9 TD's
    Player D: 114 targets, 69 catches, 941 yards, 7 TD's
    Player E: 113 targets, 67 catches, 740 yards, 6 TD's

    Here are a few examples of receivers who had similar feed numbers to Funchess on his "good year" the biggest thing for Funchess was his drops. In 2017 his drop % improved by almost 20%. He went from how do you have a job, to near his potential. The following season he missed two games, but his number didn't regress significantly he averaged only 1 YAC, his catch percentage really didn't change either. The numbers don't scream elite, but he can be a solid receiver player A is Pierre Garcon, B is Devin Funchess, C is Antonio Freeman, D is Robby Anderson, and E is Emmanuel Sanders. I know that's an array of receivers of skill sets and builds here, but plenty of solid NFL talents receive the same targets and put up similar numbers. The question with Funchess now isn't can he be solid, but like many of these other guys take the turn towards a solid career. 2019 was supposed to see where he sits. If he comes in and gets 44 catches, 550 yards, and 4 TD's he's worth the money.

    Although football's not this linear, if you double Lazard's numbers from last season to get him over 100 catches and make a lot of assumptions, he would have 104 targets, 70 catches, 954 yards, and 6 TD's. That's making a lot of assumptions. Lazard has better hands, no question on that, but to say that a guy who actually did this is a Kumerow prevention strategy is an overstatement. Now on EQ let's triple his numbers to get him to over 100 catches with the same assumptions he now is 108 targets, 63 catches, 984 yards, and 3 TD's. If that can happen, spectacular, but given the sample size of what we have seen at this point a guy who likely can get you 79 targets, 44 catches, 550 yards, and 4 TD's as a number 2 or 3 guy alone is an upgrade over what we have had at that spot. Funchess's numbers likely improve slightly on the account he has a slightly more accurate QB. I don't think Funchess will likely reach elite level, but he's coming in as a decent 2 or 3 receiver, who could get bumped if Lazard, MVS, and St. Brown can all take that step, as well as the draft pick. He's far from a Kumerow prevention strategy.

    Allen Lazard, Marquez Valdes-Scantling, and Equanimous St. Brown, all have failed to win their routes or convert a crucial third down at times. They have the potential to eventually be that guy, but Funchess has the ability to be that guy. I'm expecting Lazard to take the next step for sure, and we will see about the other three.

  7. #172
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,767
    Quote Originally Posted by IRNMN View Post
    Ehhh, that's debatable. Below are a few players in their first 100+ target season.

    Player A: 119 targets, 67 catches, 784 yards, 6 TD's
    Player B: 111 targets, 63 catches, 840 yards, 8 TD's
    Player C: 107 targets, 56 catches, 933 yards, 9 TD's
    Player D: 114 targets, 69 catches, 941 yards, 7 TD's
    Player E: 113 targets, 67 catches, 740 yards, 6 TD's

    Here are a few examples of receivers who had similar feed numbers to Funchess on his "good year" the biggest thing for Funchess was his drops. In 2017 his drop % improved by almost 20%. He went from how do you have a job, to near his potential. The following season he missed two games, but his number didn't regress significantly he averaged only 1 YAC, his catch percentage really didn't change either. The numbers don't scream elite, but he can be a solid receiver player A is Pierre Garcon, B is Devin Funchess, C is Antonio Freeman, D is Robby Anderson, and E is Emmanuel Sanders. I know that's an array of receivers of skill sets and builds here, but plenty of solid NFL talents receive the same targets and put up similar numbers. The question with Funchess now isn't can he be solid, but like many of these other guys take the turn towards a solid career. 2019 was supposed to see where he sits. If he comes in and gets 44 catches, 550 yards, and 4 TD's he's worth the money.

    Although football's not this linear, if you double Lazard's numbers from last season to get him over 100 catches and make a lot of assumptions, he would have 104 targets, 70 catches, 954 yards, and 6 TD's. That's making a lot of assumptions. Lazard has better hands, no question on that, but to say that a guy who actually did this is a Kumerow prevention strategy is an overstatement. Now on EQ let's triple his numbers to get him to over 100 catches with the same assumptions he now is 108 targets, 63 catches, 984 yards, and 3 TD's. If that can happen, spectacular, but given the sample size of what we have seen at this point a guy who likely can get you 79 targets, 44 catches, 550 yards, and 4 TD's as a number 2 or 3 guy alone is an upgrade over what we have had at that spot. Funchess's numbers likely improve slightly on the account he has a slightly more accurate QB. I don't think Funchess will likely reach elite level, but he's coming in as a decent 2 or 3 receiver, who could get bumped if Lazard, MVS, and St. Brown can all take that step, as well as the draft pick. He's far from a Kumerow prevention strategy.

    Allen Lazard, Marquez Valdes-Scantling, and Equanimous St. Brown, all have failed to win their routes or convert a crucial third down at times. They have the potential to eventually be that guy, but Funchess has the ability to be that guy. I'm expecting Lazard to take the next step for sure, and we will see about the other three.
    In his absolute best season, which statistically looks like an outlier, he was mediocre with drops. In the exact next season he led the league in drops and drop percentage again, after previously having issues.

    And you talk about guys like mvs and eq failing to step up, but what makes you think rodgers is going to trust the guy who has previously led the league in drops to make big plays on 3rd down?

    I'm his last healthy season, he didn't rank in the top 64 in really any positive metric. I think like air yards per catch was ranked in the 50s, but stuff like seperation, YAC, contested catch, drop rate and all that stuff was generally in the 80s/90s or worse. Rolling that all together puts him in line to be a mid range #3 type.

    And that list, garcon is okay I guess but nothing great. Freeman was 20 years ago, so not a super relevant comparison with the way the passing game and passing efficiency numbers have changed. Anderson had 100 more yards with comes out to a yard more per catch. He was better than sanders, so that one is a win in comparison. But again, you're looking at something that isn't happening often. And if he would have followed that up with some increasingly encouraging steps, then fine. But he followed that year up with another pretty bad year and lost snaps and targets in an offense without a ton of other weapons besides McCaffery. Rookie DJ Moore was solid too, but he wasn't special as a rookie.

    Maybe I'm wrong.but funchess looks to profile as a number 3 at best. And that doesn't even factor in that he's redundant on the roster. He wins in the intermediate routes with no YAC, wins jump balls and excels in the red zone. Adams already is one of the best red zone wr's in the nfl and lazard already possesses many of the same attributes as funchess. So I just dont see how that fits. And if he isn't the #3, he's going to have a tough time making the roster as he adds virtually no special teams help. Say what you want about MVS, but if he and funchess are even relatively close, MVS has a clear advantage as he can play both coverage units and adds an element into the offense that funchess doesn't with speed.

    And that's why he's kumerow insurance to me. If adams or lazard get hurt, there's a spot for funchess potentially (espeically lazard). And previously, kumerow was a guy Rodgers sort of trusted who was physically limited. He was kept so that in case of injury, we aren't going with UDFA types.

  8. #173
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    7,452
    The numbers on Funchess numbers
    are out 1 year, $2.5 mil, $1 mil signing bonus, $1.2 mil base, $50 k workout bonus, with an additional $15.62 k bonus per game played. There are $3.75 mil in incentives. If he plays to his max potential and healthy he could earn a total of $6.25 mil.

  9. #174
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    5,109
    Quote Originally Posted by IRNMN View Post
    The numbers on Funchess numbers
    are out 1 year, $2.5 mil, $1 mil signing bonus, $1.2 mil base, $50 k workout bonus, with an additional $15.62 k bonus per game played. There are $3.75 mil in incentives. If he plays to his max potential and healthy he could earn a total of $6.25 mil.
    Love that honestly

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •