The question about CeeDee Lamb

TW

Member
Member
Messages
7,425
Reaction score
6,252
Yes. Lamb is an excellent receiver. He can be a game changer with the right QB. The problem is, his salary demands are high because of that talent. For a team to afford him, they have to cut back on spending on supporting players. Most often, that relates to fewer reliable receivers to work with Lamb. Your team becomes "player dependent," meaning that you are putting all your hopes on this one guy being the one who will make it all happen, like magic.

This can be a problem. What happens if that stud is injured? You've just gutted your passing game. Nobody is out there that can step up, and fill that void.

Now, why he doesn't fit with the Packers. The Packers have a rather extraordinary situation. They have a lot of solid receivers, who can be a #2 on so many teams in the NFL. In fact, we may have as many as 4 guys who could fill that bill. Wicks, Doubs, Watson, and Reed. In fact, all four might... I say might.... not cut in stone.... be able to step up and be a #1 for several teams as well. This is pure talent we're talking about, and only the surface has been scratched as to how good these guys are. I'd take this mix over Lamb any day. Especially when you add in the threats we have at TE with Musgrave and Kraft. This is a group that doesn't need tweaking in any way nor form.

Add in our running backs, and Love at QB, the only place we need, or could really use, improvement is in a back up QB, and along the offensive line, with young guys who can emerge in a couple of years as viable veterans to fill roles for the rest of this decade.

On defense, I think Hafely is already showing us what these guys can do in the 4-3. I don't think we have any weaknesses that are pronounced, on that side of the ball.

If I was to point at anything, and call it a weak link, I'm afraid it would be our kicking game. Not our punting game, but kicking. I'm not a bit convinced we have a guy in camp that I'd be willing to trust when the chips are down. I think the coaching staff knows that too, and are working to correct the problem.
 
Only talk on CD Lamb are the same people who every who make up stuff every time for clicks that this big name is out there GB is in the mix to get them. I doubt GB has even called Dallas to see if Lamb is up for trade. Not when he is going to make $35 million or more a yar in trade. If Jerry would be dumb enough to trade him Dallas fans would scream for Jerry's head. I expect Jerry is going to cave give Lamb what he wants and keep him. Dallas really has nothing else for Dak to throw to.

For GB this is going to be key years for Watson and Doubs to step up to show they can at least be a #2 target. If Watson can't stay healthy GB is likely going to just let him walk as a FA after the 2025 season. Doubs last year seemed to run hot and cold at times looking like he could be a future one then at times were did he go kind of thing. If this WR group can have guys like Watson, Doubs, Reed and Wicks be solid #2 WR's then you really don't need any of them to be a #1 WR as you can spread the ball around. But if only 1 or none of these guys step up into a #2 role then yes you will need to look for more of a #1 guy who can make the big catches and take double teams were these guys if they are only low end #2 or a #3/4 type of guy can get open more.
 
Lamb is more valuable to Dallas than anywhere else, and so is Dak. Their agents know this and so does Dallas, hence the impasse.
 
improvement is in a back up QB, and along the offensive line, with young guys who can emerge in a couple of years as viable veterans to fill roles for the rest of this decade.
I think the OL is still very week beyond OL #6 or 7th . The depth beat up a very weak Browns 3rd string defense. We should be scanning waivers for a better back up OT in my opinion.

Lamb will never be in play for GB, they love the guys they have.
 
I think the OL is still very week beyond OL #6 or 7th . The depth beat up a very weak Browns 3rd string defense. We should be scanning waivers for a better back up OT in my opinion.

Lamb will never be in play for GB, they love the guys they have.
Thing is every team is looking for good OT. If you want a decent backup swing OT you will have to give something to get something. Would you be willing to give up Slaton or Karl Brooks to get a decent backup OT?
 
Thing is every team is looking for good OT. If you want a decent backup swing OT you will have to give something to get something. Would you be willing to give up Slaton or Karl Brooks to get a decent backup OT?
That's not 100% true. Limited rosters still make finding some depth possible if you do your scouting correct.
 
That's not 100% true. Limited rosters still make finding some depth possible if you do your scouting correct.
I was thinking more a number 3 OT. While it's hard to get any team to give up it's number 3 OT if they are really short at another spot they might be willing so if they can get something that could be a starter at another spot.
 
Back
Top