2017 Draft/FA Needs - Ranked

[HardRightEdge]

Absolutely agreed that Hyde shouldn't be paid anywhere close to $7-8 million a season.

Shouldn't and won't.

 

[Dantés]

Hyde is a 2-4 million dollar guy depending on who you are. He is a serviceable back up that can return punts. I would be okay with them going younger here with a player that has more upside and saving some $.

Hyde lacks speed and relies on instincts to make plays.

I wouldn't call Hyde a backup in today's NFL. He's a sub package DB, and a pretty good one. Those guys play 70+% of the snaps. He isn't a pure cover corner, but he does make plays. In 2016, regular and post season, he picked off 4 passes, defended 12, and came up with 2 sacks. I would certainly bring back that kind of production, with the goal of getting the outside corner spots under control so that Hyde can play that nickel/dime back role where he thrives.

 

[PackerDNA]

I would be interested in your ideas about improving the pass rush though as letting Perry walk away in free agency and cutting Matthews would leave the Packers with only Fackrell under contract for next season at outside linebacker.

When I have time for a long post that I have in mind- allowing for my speedy 2 fingered typing style- I'll be happy to post and discuss them with you. None of these things will happen- not one- because of the stiff in the GM chair, but as I'll show, all are doable. It's math and how you structure or redo contracts.
I never advocated letting Perry walk, although I have a feeling he may not want to be back here. I'm for letting Matthews go, but maybe not until next season; that would depend on one of my scenarios. That's the things I said, not what you keep insisting I said.
Also, I don't understand that any such moves leave us only with Fackrell for next season, Cap. These moves aren't made in a vacuum, and I'm sure you as much as anyone know that other moves will be made; not just, well, we're stuck with only Fackrell for the year.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I never advocated letting Perry walk, although I have a feeling he may not want to be back here. I'm for letting Matthews go, but maybe not until next season; that would depend on one of my scenarios. That's the things I said, not what you keep insisting I said.

Hmmm, here's what you previously posted in this thread:

A lot of people here have suggested what I'll call a game of shuffle the dollars. It goes like this;
Take Shields money, give it to a top FA CB.
Let's expand on that.
A) Perry prices himself out of here by demanding to be paid like one of the game's top LB's - which he's not.
Take his money give it to the Pat's Donte Hightower.
B)Cut Thomas, don't resign D.Jones or Peppers, take the savings and give it to Hightower.
C) Cut Matthews, give the money to Hightower.

It seems to me you are in favor of letting Perry walk in free agency and cutting Matthews after all.

Also, I don't understand that any such moves leave us only with Fackrell for next season, Cap. These moves aren't made in a vacuum, and I'm sure you as much as anyone know that other moves will be made; not just, well, we're stuck with only Fackrell for the year.

It's a fact that those moves would currently result in only Fackrell being under contract at outside linebacker for next year. Of course moves would be made before the start of next season but it's awfully tough to sign or draft five decent OLBs in a single offseason.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Again, separate scenarios, Perry's being self explanatory, or at least I thought it would be . Apparently not for you.
Your last part is agreeing with me but having to be pissy and technical about it; read your last sentence.

If you don't realize that having only a single outside linebacker, who has a total of 161 career snaps, under contract entering this offseason while trying to improve the pass rush is a problem there's no reason to further discuss about it with you.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'm not going to read all the posts here, so if anybody has already mentioned the Connor Barwin rumors, accept my apologies. Or don't. Some reports have the Packers expressing interest though that might well be a speculation that gets exaggerated in the media echo chamber.

I'm not much for the free agent chatter where every guy with a name gets mentioned and I'd rather see the money go to a vet corner. However, Barwin presents an interesting possibility in lieu of Perry or Matthews, especially Matthews.

Start with Barwin having his best seasons at 3-4 OLB (14.5 sacks in 2015 2014) vs. 4-3 DE (2016). He and Matthews are separated in age by only a few months. Barwin has played all 16 games over the last 6 seasons, suggesting a durability that Matthews and Perry have not demonstrated. Barwin is a better edge defender; Matthews' strength was in backside pursuit which only shows up maybe once per game.

As for Matthews, paying him that kind of money to play ILB as some pundits suggest is absurd. Capers rarely used Matthews at ILB for the pass rush with Perry and Peppers outside, which tells what our erstwhile DC thinks of Matthews at the position. And frankly, on those few occasions Capers tried it, Matthews didn't do much. He spent the better part of 1 1/2 seasons at ILB and was mediocre at best. Is he going to better at it now? No reason to think so.

Even at OLB he's a health risk well beyond the value in the current contract.

If Matthews would not renegotiate, I'd cut him. A $15 million 2017 cap number (and another $11.4 mil next year) for this player is ridiculous. He's become a habit with growing liabilities.

So, taking that $10 - 11 mil (depending on timing) in Matthews cap savings this season and using some of it on Barwin would be a net add in my opinion if Matthews does not renegotiate.

Now, might Thompson be interested in a trade? Highly unlikely, if he has to give up a mid-round pick and take on $18.6 in cap over two years. But what if Philly can't swing a trade and they cut him? A Peppers replay? A new contract with deferred cap using a signing bonus? Perhaps...if Thompson is not outbid. There would be several mil left over going toward a CB.

Yah know, if Matthews was an on-field leader who could rally the troops in the manner of a Woodson, there would be mitigating factors. But he's more like the fading virtuoso violist than the conductor of the orchestra. Is this harsh? Well, he's been overpaid in the few seasons mor than Hawk was overpaid in his, and I don't recall any tears being shed over that move.

 

[Dantés]

I'm not going to read all the posts here, so if anybody has already mentioned the Connor Barwin rumors, accept my apologies. Or don't. Some reports have the Packers expressing interest though that might well be a speculation that gets exaggerated in the media echo chamber.

I'm not much for the free agent chatter where every guy with a name gets mentioned and I'd rather see the money go to a vet corner. However, Barwin presents an interesting possibility in lieu of Perry or Matthews, especially Matthews.

Start with Barwin having his best seasons at 3-4 OLB (14.5 sacks in 2015) vs. 4-3 DE (2016). He and Matthews are separated in age by only a few months. He's played all 16 games over the last 6 seasons, suggesting a durability that Matthews and Perry have not demonstrated. Barwin is a better edge defender; Matthews strength was in backside pursuit.

As for Matthews, paying him that kind of money to play ILB is absurd. Capers rarely used a Matthews at ILB with Perry and Peppers outside, which tells what our erstwhile DC thinks of Matthews at the position. And frankly, on those few occasions Capers tried it, Matthews didn't do much. At any position he's a health risk well beyond the value in the current contract.

If Matthews would not renegotiate, I'd cut him. A $15 million 2017 cap number (and another $11.4 mil next year) for this player is ridiculous. He's become a habit with growing liabilities.

So, taking that $10 - 11 mil (depending on timing) in Matthews cap savings this season and using some of it on Barwin would be a net add in my opinion if Matthews does not renegotiate.

Now, might Thompson be interested in a trade? Highly unlikely, if he has to give up a mid-round pick and take on $18.6 in cap over two years. But what if Philly can't swing a trade and they cut him? A Peppers replay? A new contract with deferred cap using a signing bonus? Perhaps...if Thompson is not outbid. There would be several mil left over going toward a CB.

I don't really have a huge problem with the idea of swapping Barwin for Matthews on the roster. The financial component is a compelling argument. But I would point out that Barwin's 14.5 sack season was actually in 2014. He had 7 sacks in 2015, his last in a 3-4 defense.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Start with Barwin having his best seasons at 3-4 OLB (14.5 sacks in 2015) vs. 4-3 DE (2016). He and Matthews are separated in age by only a few months. He's played all 16 games over the last 6 seasons, suggesting a durability that Matthews and Perry have not demonstrated. Barwin is a better edge defender; Matthews strength was in backside pursuit.

Barwin had 14.5 sacks in 2014 but already regressed still playing in a 3-4 defense the following season. I don't believe he would be a significant upgrade over Matthews.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

IF YOU DON"T REALIZE THAT I"M NOT SAYING ENTER THE SEASON WITH ONE OLB UNDER CONTRACT< THEN YOU ARE A ******* IDIOT AND THERE"S NO POINT TRYING TO POUND IT THROUGH YOUR 10 FOOT THICK SKULL>

Do you understand there's a difference between entering the offseason with a single outside linebacker (which I'm talking about) and having only one player at the position at the start of the season (something you are implying I have posted for some random reason)???

 

[HardRightEdge]

Barwin had 14.5 sacks in 2014 but already regressed still playing in a 3-4 defense the following season. I don't believe he would be a significant upgrade over Matthews.

He wouldn't need to be a significant upgrade. If he played on par, it would be significant cap savings over 2 years if Matthews does not renegotiate. You're also more likely to get a 16 game player.

Of just forget Barwin altogether and consider other options. Matthews' $15 mil cap hit on it's face is absurd.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I don't really have a huge problem with the idea of swapping Barwin for Matthews on the roster. The financial component is a compelling argument. But I would point out that Barwin's 14.5 sack season was actually in 2014. He had 7 sacks in 2015, his last in a 3-4 defense.

Yeah, I goofed on the year. Even 7 sacks is about the kind of player Matthews has become as the serial injuries mount. And again...the financials.

 

[Dantés]

Yeah, I goofed on the year. Even 7 sacks is about the kind of player Matthews has become as the serial injuries mount. And again...the financials.

Yeah, I see your point. I don't really think he's much of an upgrade but if he could be had more cheaply it could be a worthy move. The problem for the Packers is that Matthews is still a face of the franchise.

 

[Dantés]

Hey does anyone have any thoughts as to how many OLB's we should aim to have under contract going into the offseason and/or the regular season? Please and thank you.

 

[thisisnate]

IF YOU DON"T REALIZE THAT I"M NOT SAYING ENTER THE SEASON WITH ONE OLB UNDER CONTRACT< THEN YOU ARE A ******* IDIOT AND THERE"S NO POINT TRYING TO POUND IT THROUGH YOUR 10 FOOT THICK SKULL>

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[HardRightEdge]

The problem for the Packers is that Matthews is still a face of the franchise.

Rodgers is the face of the franchise, but the point is taken...he's the face of the defense. However, this defense is mediocre and prone to collapse. A "makeover" is in order.

 

[PackerDNA]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Heh, LOL. The funny thing Nate, is I like the guy and consider him one of our best posters. Good thing the exchange wasn't face to face; I wouldn't be blowing in a bag to vent.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Now you 're problem is with the OFFSEASON.

I never mentioned anything about being concerned entering the season with only a single outside linebacker.

 

[brandon2348]

I'm not going to read all the posts here, so if anybody has already mentioned the Connor Barwin rumors, accept my apologies. Or don't. Some reports have the Packers expressing interest though that might well be a speculation that gets exaggerated in the media echo chamber.

I'm not much for the free agent chatter where every guy with a name gets mentioned and I'd rather see the money go to a vet corner. However, Barwin presents an interesting possibility in lieu of Perry or Matthews, especially Matthews.

Start with Barwin having his best seasons at 3-4 OLB (14.5 sacks in 2015 2014) vs. 4-3 DE (2016). He and Matthews are separated in age by only a few months. Barwin has played all 16 games over the last 6 seasons, suggesting a durability that Matthews and Perry have not demonstrated. Barwin is a better edge defender; Matthews' strength was in backside pursuit which only shows up maybe once per game.

As for Matthews, paying him that kind of money to play ILB as some pundits suggest is absurd. Capers rarely used Matthews at ILB for the pass rush with Perry and Peppers outside, which tells what our erstwhile DC thinks of Matthews at the position. And frankly, on those few occasions Capers tried it, Matthews didn't do much. He spent the better part of 1 1/2 seasons at ILB and was mediocre at best. Is he going to better at it now? No reason to think so.

Even at OLB he's a health risk well beyond the value in the current contract.

If Matthews would not renegotiate, I'd cut him. A $15 million 2017 cap number (and another $11.4 mil next year) for this player is ridiculous. He's become a habit with growing liabilities.

So, taking that $10 - 11 mil (depending on timing) in Matthews cap savings this season and using some of it on Barwin would be a net add in my opinion if Matthews does not renegotiate.

Now, might Thompson be interested in a trade? Highly unlikely, if he has to give up a mid-round pick and take on $18.6 in cap over two years. But what if Philly can't swing a trade and they cut him? A Peppers replay? A new contract with deferred cap using a signing bonus? Perhaps...if Thompson is not outbid. There would be several mil left over going toward a CB.

Yah know, if Matthews was an on-field leader who could rally the troops in the manner of a Woodson, there would be mitigating factors. But he's more like the fading virtuoso violist than the conductor of the orchestra. Is this harsh? Well, he's been overpaid in the few seasons mor than Hawk was overpaid in his, and I don't recall any tears being shed over that move.

He is a fading virtuoso violinist with carpel tunnel in his playing hand or maybe worse. I think your spot on.

Part of being a successful GM is knowing when its time to move on from a player. Inside or outside there is just no getting to almost 16 mill with Matthews. Whether they trade him or release him I think its time to move on as I doubt Mattews will be willing to take a significant pay cut.

At least Barwin isnt as injury prone. A move back to a 3-4 and Nick Perry on the other side might see his production go up.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Here's your problem; you're need to overanalyze and dissect every letter of every word of every post. Then beat it to death and beyond, even when it's clear that you're wrong, or it doesn't matter, or is even of any importance to the post or it's meaning or intent. For as smart as you are, you can be thick as a brick, and I am, at least for now, done smashing my head against a brick wall.

I truly love posters on a forum analyzing other ones while sitting in front of a computer screen.

As a side note I'm absolutely capable of acknowledging of being wrong but truly have no idea at which point I was in this discussion.

 

[brandon2348]

. The problem for the Packers is that Matthews is still a face of the franchise.

Matthews is the face of hamstring injuries and thats about it right now.

 

[PackerDNA]

I truly love posters on a forum analyzing other ones while sitting in front of a computer screen.

As a side note I'm absolutely capable of acknowledging of being wrong but truly have no idea at which point I was in this discussion.

You don't get it, I'm not wasting time on this anymore. It's a merry go round.
Nothing personal, Cap. I like you here, I enjoy your posts. Let's get back to football or whatever, but I'm tired of the BS part of posting here, which is becoming enough to make me say the hell with it all.

 

[Zartan]

Alright alright lets settle down here, no more fighting here please.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Whether they trade him or release him I think its time to move on as I doubt Mattews will be willing to take a significant pay cut.

Matthews has no trade value. The 2 years left on his contract has $26.5 mil in cap. Even with the Packers on the hook for $4 mil of prorated signing bonus left in the deal, somebody would need to take on $22.5 mil in cap for 2 years while giving up something in trade. That ain't gonna happen.

Matthews not willing to take a significant pay cut? Perhaps, I'm not a mind reader. But if he won't take it, the path is clear. This contract was structured to account for this possible eventuality.

Matthews would be smart to get his numbers down to at least what his agent can project as the going rate for a Connor Barwin or equivalent player. Matthews injury history alone indicates sharp depreciation of value.

 

[Mavster]

Sounds like GB will end up overpaying Perry out of pure desperation, keeping an incredibly overpaid Clay, & then possibly going after Barwin as the cherry on top.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Sounds like GB will end up overpaying Perry out of pure desperation, keeping an incredibly overpaid Clay, & then possibly going after Barwin as the cherry on top.

No, they won't. It would be too much multiyear cap allocated to one position group with too many other holes to fill.