2017 Draft/FA Needs

[Deleted member 6794]

Did you mean Simon of the Texans?

Yes.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Not a lot of information in today's interview with TT, but can pick up on a few things.

WOW on his ducking of the Josh Sitton situation. Almost looked like he was trying to not remember who Sitton even was. LOL

http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...-Packers/738bec69-8434-4e00-b188-43bc97d3c538

 

[brandon2348]

Free Agency- Release Clay Matthews. Re-sign Perry, Cook, Jones, Hyde, Lang or Tretter.

Go out and sign Calais Campbell, Arizona DT and Stephon Gilmore, Buffalo CB


1. Haason Red****, Temple OLB

2. Ryan Anderson, Alabama OLB

3. Damontae Kazee, San Diego State CB/ Fabian Moreau, UCLA (I am really torn on this one)

4. Carlos Henderson, Louisiana Tech WR

5. Marlon Mack, South Florida RB

5. Kyle Kalis, Michigan G

6. Jaylen Myrick, Minnesota CB

7. Darreus Rogers, USC WR

This would be going "All In"

 

[Dantés]

I don't think you'll need to be torn over Kazee/Moreau in round 3. Moreau won't be an option there.

 

[brandon2348]

I don't think you'll need to be torn over Kazee/Moreau in round 3. Moreau won't be an option there.

Thats fine. I'll take Kazee and Sutton could slip.

 

[brandon2348]

I don't think you'll need to be torn over Kazee/Moreau in round 3. Moreau won't be an option there.

Regardless the blue print above would take the pass rush to a whole new level. We would have guys that can rush the passer from "everywhere" on the field. That's what I call "WINNING"

 

[Dantés]

Regardless the blue print above would take the pass rush to a whole new level. We would have guys that can rush the passer from "everywhere" on the field. That's what I call "WINNING"

I know you're going to hate this, but I just don't think that's realistic. In Campbell, Gilmore, Perry, and Lang you have one team paying for arguably the top players at DL, CB, EDGE, and OG. It doesn't seem realistic that one team, even with cap space ranking in the 8-13 range (depending on what you do with Matthews) could end up signing 4 guys, all of which are arguably in the top 15 of free agents available overall and each of which are to be the top or 2nd most coveted guy on the market.

The cap money available this offseason is silly. Teams at the top (CLE, SF, TB, JAC, TEN) are going to drive up the market with the amount they can spend. I will not bat an eyelash if Campbell and Gilmore both get into the 15M/season range or above. Perry could easily approach that as well. Lang will probably be around 8-10M. Conservatively speaking, you could very well be talking about 50M in annual spending just on those four dudes. Plus other free agents and a draft class.

If they managed to keep Perry and Lang while signing just one of those premier FA options, that would really be something.

 

[brandon2348]

I know you're going to hate this, but I just don't think that's realistic. In Campbell, Gilmore, Perry, and Lang you have one team paying for arguably the top players at DL, CB, EDGE, and OG. It doesn't seem realistic that one team, even with cap space ranking in the 8-13 range (depending on what you do with Matthews) could end up signing 4 guys, all of which are arguably in the top 15 of free agents available overall and each of which are to be the top or 2nd most coveted guy on the market.

The cap money available this offseason is silly. Teams at the top (CLE, SF, TB, JAC, TEN) are going to drive up the market with the amount they can spend. I will not bat an eyelash if Campbell and Gilmore both get into the 15M/season range or above. Perry could easily approach that as well. Lang will probably be around 8-10M. Conservatively speaking, you could very well be talking about 50M in annual spending just on those four dudes. Plus other free agents and a draft class.

If they managed to keep Perry and Lang while signing just one of those premier FA options, that would really be something.

I don't think its unrealistic at all. I"m not saying Campbell is Reggie White but Wolf was able to get him. I don't think its out of this world to go out and get Campbell and Gilmore. If you send Matthews on his way and "Get Better" you have 51 million.

If you have to then let Lang and Hyde go, We dont need to be paying a Guard 10 million. Thats just stupid. I am fine with Tretter. There are ways to structure it. Just go ask John Elway.

Do you want a better chance at a Super Bowl or have you accepted getting your heart broken every year?

 

[Dantés]

I don't think its unrealistic at all. I"m not saying Campbell is Reggie White but Wolf was able to get him. I don't think its out of this world to go out and get Campbell and Gilmore. If you send Matthews on his way and "Get Better" you have 51 million.

If you have to then let Lang and Hyde go, I am fine with Tretter. There are ways to structure it. Just go ask John Elway.

I'm not buying the "there are ways" argument. The only way one team outside the top 10 in cap space manages to lock down 25% of the top free agents available is if they blow everybody else out of the water with their offers and structure the contracts with prorated bonuses such that they end up in cap hell in years following. I don't know what the Elway comment is about. He never spent the type of money you're suggesting. He certainly used free agency, but a number of his impact moves were value signings because of things like age (Ware, Mathis) or checkered histories (Talib). His big splurge in 2014 on Talib, Ware, Ward, and Sanders came out to about 30M/season total.

 

[brandon2348]

Y

I'm not buying the "there are ways" argument. The only way one team outside the top 10 in cap space manages to lock down 25% of the top free agents available is if they blow everybody else out of the water with their offers and structure the contracts with prorated bonuses such that they end up in cap hell in years following. I don't know what the Elway comment is about. He never spent the type of money you're suggesting. He certainly used free agency, but a number of his impact moves were value signings because of things like age (Ware, Mathis) or checkered histories (Talib). His big splurge in 2014 on Talib, Ware, Ward, and Sanders came out to about 30M/season total.

Look if you can justify paying Matthews(the 96th rated OLB in 2016) 16 million next year and then lock up 10 million at one guard position then I don't know what to tell ya man. Maybe these guys deserve to bottom out.

Shields was set to make over 12 mill next year. That is the baseline to sign Gilmore. I would bump Perry up to 10 times 4. Give Campbell a three year 40 mill. Cook will probably land in 4.5-5 range times two years. Jones get a 1 year 4

Part of being a good GM is getting these guys to want to come to your organizatioin. Yes, it's $ driven but there is still a recruitment approach to it that TT knows nothing about. If he cant sell Aaron Rodgers and playing in Green Bay then he should just move on.

Maybe

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Look if you can justify paying Matthews(the 96th rated OLB in 2016) 16 million next year and then lock up 10 million at one guard position then I don't know what to tell ya man. Maybe these guys deserve to bottom out.

I haven't seen anyone try to justify Clay's salary next year, just the opposite. But that contract was signed 4 years ago and at the time was considered reasonable for the player he was at the time. Crap happens and a team comes out on the short end of the stick sometimes.

Also, if you are going to talk about "justifying" what the Packers may pay Clay, you should look at $10.975M, not "$16M", the rest is dead cap.

The same thing could happen with guys you are promoting to sign, you just never really know.

 

[PackerDNA]

I'm not buying the "there are ways" argument. The only way one team outside the top 10 in cap space manages to lock down 25% of the top free agents available is if they blow everybody else out of the water with their offers and structure the contracts with prorated bonuses such that they end up in cap hell in years following. I don't know what the Elway comment is about. He never spent the type of money you're suggesting. He certainly used free agency, but a number of his impact moves were value signings because of things like age (Ware, Mathis) or checkered histories (Talib). His big splurge in 2014 on Talib, Ware, Ward, and Sanders came out to about 30M/season total.

While you make good, reasoned points, yes, 'there are ways'.

- Redo Rodgers contract frees up $10M or more- you're going to extend him anyway, right?
-cut Guion and Thomas.
-DO NOT RESIGN; Elliott, D. Jones, Peppers, Barclay ,etc.
-redo thru any of a number of ways- if necessary- guys like Cobb.
-sign/resign Campbell, Hightower, a top CB, Lang, Lacy, Perry,Cook, maybe Hyde. Total cap hits 2017-around $43M.
-trade up for a pass rushing OLB. Make it a 2 or 3 player draft; meaning less late round picks and experiments, more guys who actually play and play well from day one.
In a nutshell, looong story short, you can keep/sign the above and not even cut Matthews this year. Use all the tools, do math. The hardest part is some other team comes in with an offer in the stratosphere- in which case you wouldn't pay it anyway- or your target doesn't want to be here, or would rather be somewhere else.

 

[brandon2348]

I haven't seen anyone try to justify Clay's salary next year, just the opposite. But that contract was signed 4 years ago and at the time was considered reasonable for the player he was at the time. Crap happens and a team comes out on the short end of the stick sometimes.

Also, if you are going to talk about "justifying" what the Packers may pay Clay, you should look at $10.975M, the rest is dead cap.

See, that approach isn't going all in. It"s like lets pay him the 15 cause we don"t wanna pay out any dead money even though organization is making money hand over fist.

I am looking at the 11 mill which takes the cap space to 51 million.

 

[Mondio]

If he was healthy and played like he did I'd feel much more strongly about cutting him this year, but he had a rather significant injury that obviously limited him.

My guess is nothing happens with his contract and they hope he gets healthy and gets to a respectable level. I'd like 14 sacks and hair on fire Clay, though I'll take 8-10 sack clay with smoldering hair considering our lack of pass rushers on the roster right now. If he under performs this year I suspect next year is when we see his contract voided by the team.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

See, that approach isn't going all in. It"s like lets pay him the 15 cause we don"t wanna pay out any dead money even though organization is making money hand over fist.

I am looking at the 11 mill which takes the cap space to 51 million.

The bold is what separates you and I. I don't want to see the Packers go "all in" for one shot at a SB, when in the last 7 years, they have been knocking on the door or in all 7 years.

Also, the "dead" money is paid out no matter what you do.

Finally, whether the organization is "making money hands over fist" or not, they are still operating under the same cap restraints as every other NFL team.

 

[brandon2348]

The bold is what separates you and I. I don't want to see the Packers go "all in" for one shot at a SB, when in the last 7 years, they have been knocking on the door or in all 7 years.

I don't think its all that bold though. Releasing a broken down football player and clearing 11 million in cap space so you can actually get value for that $? Going out and paying and signing a no.1 corner for the same money they were gonna pay Shields who was older? Going out and locking up a premier DT for 3 years in his prime that will give this team pass rush up the middle which they have never seen before?

These are the type of moves it takes to win a Super Bowl. Did you not see my draft? There all kinds of guys there that provide development and value.

 

[Dantés]

See, that approach isn't going all in. It"s like lets pay him the 15 cause we don"t wanna pay out any dead money even though organization is making money hand over fist.

I am looking at the 11 mill which takes the cap space to 51 million.

I can voice the opinion that your numbers don't add up without saying that Clay's contract is a good investment. I would be fine if they cut him. That's not the issue. The issue is that you're proposing a plan that has the Packers somehow outbidding a bunch of teams with much more money than we have. Frankly, I don't think we have the space to do what you're suggesting with or without Clay. Even if they were willing to mortgage the next 4 seasons, which they should NOT be willing to do, you would still have to have a situation where the top players want to take less than what they could get elsewhere to play in Green Bay.

 

[Dantés]

While you make good, reasoned points, yes, 'there are ways'.

- Redo Rodgers contract frees up $10M or more- you're going to extend him anyway, right?
-cut Guion and Thomas.
-DO NOT RESIGN; Elliott, D. Jones, Peppers, Barclay ,etc.
-redo thru any of a number of ways- if necessary- guys like Cobb.
-sign/resign Campbell, Hightower, a top CB, Lang, Lacy, Perry,Cook, maybe Hyde. Total cap hits 2017-around $43M.
-trade up for a pass rushing OLB. Make it a 2 or 3 player draft; meaning less late round picks and experiments, more guys who actually play and play well from day one.
In a nutshell, looong story short, you can keep/sign the above and not even cut Matthews this year. Use all the tools, do math. The hardest part is some other team comes in with an offer in the stratosphere- in which case you wouldn't pay it anyway- or your target doesn't want to be here, or would rather be somewhere else.

What this translates to is a team in cap purgatory without any depth. If they spend all their space and all their picks and just a few premium resources, then they're going to be filling out a lot of the roster with UDFA's. Plus to get all these guys in together under the cap, they'd have to use amortized bonuses, which would leave them in a mess in a couple seasons (when Rodgers will still be very good and you still want to give yourself a shot). I think your estimate in bold is highly optimistic. I would not be surprised if those players totaled around 75M in average annual salary.

 

[Dantés]

I find it odd that one would think that this kind of crazy spending is "what it takes to win a Super Bowl" since the vast majority of the times that teams try to go out there, "win the offseason," and buy a championship, they fail miserably. Denver came the closest to winnning a ring via FA, but even they didn't spend like what's being suggested here. This is Washington/Miami crap.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't think its all that bold though. Releasing a broken down football player and clearing 11 million in cap space so you can actually get value for that $? Going out and paying and signing a no.1 corner for the same money they were gonna pay Shields who was older? Going out and locking up a premier DT for 3 years in his prime that will give this team pass rush up the middle which they have never seen before?

These are the type of moves it takes to win a Super Bowl. Did you not see my draft? There all kinds of guys there that provide development and value.

It's very easy to make bold predictions, when you factor in the upside of everyone of your decisions. However, if you look at the downside or at least somewhere in between, such decisions become a lot more muddied. Those decisions become even more muddied if you start crunching real cap numbers and the real possibility that none of those players will be available to sign for the value the Packers have them at.

As far as your draft, no, I didn't look at it. Draft fodder is fun, but way too many variables, especially at this time of year, to even put much thought into my own "dream draft", yet alone someone else's.

 

[brandon2348]

What this translates to is a team in cap purgatory without any depth. If they spend all their space and all their picks and just a few premium resources, then they're going to be filling out Tha lot of the roster with UDFA's..

'
What they hell have they been doing then? T'hey had UDFA's all over the roster and on the field last year. This is crap. They have had ****** depth forever.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If he was healthy and played like he did I'd feel much more strongly about cutting him this year, but he had a rather significant injury that obviously limited him.

My guess is nothing happens with his contract and they hope he gets healthy and gets to a respectable level.

I don't believe Thompson will approach Matthews about renegotiating his contract either. Unfortunately that's a mistake as Clay is vastly overpaid though.

 

[brandon2348]

It's very easy to make bold predictions, when you factor in the upside of everyone of your decisions. However, if you look at the downside or at least somewhere in between, such decisions become a lot more muddied. Those decisions become even more muddied if you start crunching real cap numbers and the real possibility that none of those players will be available to sign for the value the Packers have them at.

As far as your draft, no, I didn't look at it. Draft fodder is fun, but way too many variables, especially at this time of year, to even put much thought into my own "dream draft", yet alone someone else's.

"No risk it no biscuit"

 

[brandon2348]

If he was healthy and played like he did I'd feel much more strongly about cutting him this year, but he had a rather significant injury that obviously limited him.

My guess is nothing happens with his contract and they hope he gets healthy and gets to a respectable level. I'd like 14 sacks and hair on fire Clay, though I'll take 8-10 sack clay with smoldering hair considering our lack of pass rushers on the roster right now. If he under performs this year I suspect next year is when we see his contract voided by the team.

So stay mediocre? Great plan.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

"No risk it no biscuit"

or...end up eating your dog biscuits in Cleveland?