Best offseason in the NFC north

[Ace]

Besides, every single team in the league has a weak position or two. It seems like you want TT to fill every need and not have any.

Agree 100% with this. There's no way to be great at every position. We are great at a few, really good at most and not so good at some. To expect more IMO is unreasonable. I love the saying of "you can wish in one hand and $#!t in another and see which fills up first" and I think it applies here. What we have to have happen are the guys that we expect to be great need to continue to be great, the really good guys need to keep being really good and the guys who are asked to fill positions where we arent' so good need to step up and we'll be fine.

 

[AmishMafia]

It's true that you neber know what is going to happen in the draft. That's why teams should selectively address position of needs in free agency, doing it in a smart way.

The Packers would have saved $3.825 million in cap space by releasing Hawk and Jones prior to the 2014 season.

Jones and Hawk count $2.6M against the cap this season. It would have been more last season. Its not just cash but cap capa ity as well. Im not saying we should not have done the FA signing, im just saying there are lots of risk and unknowns that are easy to second guess in hind-sight.

You can make the same argument for a FA safety last season. And very likely every penny of that would have been wasted. Anyhow, that is how i look at it.

 

[DaveRoller]

Jones and Hawk count $2.6M against the cap this season. It would have been more last season. Its not just cash but cap capa ity as well. Im not saying we should not have done the FA signing, im just saying there are lots of risk and unknowns that are easy to second guess in hind-sight.

You can make the same argument for a FA safety last season. And very likely every penny of that would have been wasted. Anyhow, that is how i look at it.

Agree wholeheartedly that there are lots of risks and unknowns, but that is why a NFL GM either gets paid big bucks or gets shown the door. TT gets paid big bucks for being more successful at minimizing the risks and projecting the unknowns than most of his peers.

I also agree that the dead space against the cap for Jones and Hawk (which would as you noted have been even greater in 2014 than it is in 2015) certainly explains why the Pack may have been reluctant to dump them last offseason. But someone has to be held accountable for paying (overpaying) Hawk and Jones all that money on their 2nd contracts (which perhaps precluded the team from bringing in better options in 2014), no?

 

[AmishMafia]

Agree wholeheartedly that there are lots of risks and unknowns, but that is why a NFL GM either gets paid big bucks or gets shown the door. TT gets paid big bucks for being more successful at minimizing the risks and projecting the unknowns than most of his peers.

I also agree that the dead space against the cap for Jones and Hawk (which would as you noted have been even greater in 2014 than it is in 2015) certainly explains why the Pack may have been reluctant to dump them last offseason. But someone has to be held accountable for paying (overpaying) Hawk and Jones all that money on their 2nd contracts (which perhaps precluded the team from bringing in better options in 2014), no?

Definitely a bad move extending either of those guys. But making another mistake will not correct a past error.

The thing with FAs is they are usually a FA for a reason. If their own team doesnt resign them its likely because they are asking for too much, are character risks, bad for team morale, or are in decline. So a FA who can add value to your team is not that common.

Occassionally there are guys who are used wrong, dont fit a new system, or whatever and represent value. Those guys are not the norm.

 

[TJV]

But someone has to be held accountable for paying (overpaying) Hawk and Jones all that money on their 2nd contracts...

Ted Thompson is accountable. Now what?

 

[AmishMafia]

Ted Thompson is accountable. Now what?

Fire him!

 

[ivo610]

I'm sorry, but there is no possible way that any sane person could say that a team that loses a quality starting corner, quality nickel corner and an adequate ILB didn't regress on defense when that team replaced those players with three rookies. You might HOPE that the team improves on defense but that hope is resting on the belief that two rookie corners will play as well as House and Hayward and that Hayward will play as well as Tramon. The offense will improve but that improvement hinges on oline health more than anything else.

I think we have a different definition of quality.

I remember when everyone was up in arms in 2010 when I pointed out the offense got better statically when Finley went down.

You may be right. The defense may be worse. They also might benefit from raji being back and Hayward moving. Losing hawk is a bonus

 

[Passepartout]

Defense wins the game indeed. But Ted should be credited with helping out the team. Getting Rodgers and McCarthy.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Besides, every single team in the league has a weak position or two. It seems like you want TT to fill every need and not have any.

I agree that it´s impossible for a team to be great at every position. But I don´t like Thompson only spending a fourth round pick on the position in most dire need of an upgrade.

Jones and Hawk count $2.6M against the cap this season. It would have been more last season. Its not just cash but cap capa ity as well. Im not saying we should not have done the FA signing, im just saying there are lots of risk and unknowns that are easy to second guess in hind-sight.

Hawk and Jones counted $9.025 million towards the cap in 2014. Cutting them before the season would have resulted in $5.2 million dead money. Hence, the move would have saved the Packers $3.825 million.

The thing with FAs is they are usually a FA for a reason. If their own team doesnt resign them its likely because they are asking for too much, are character risks, bad for team morale, or are in decline. So a FA who can add value to your team is not that common.

Occassionally there are guys who are used wrong, dont fit a new system, or whatever and represent value. Those guys are not the norm.

Sometimes teams can´t re-sign all of their free agents because of the salary cap. Some of you act like there aren´t any successful free agent signings at all.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

For 56 minutes him being their entire offense lead to exactly 0 offensive points.

So you don't think the Packers might have been able to score an extra FG if the offense had been on the field for an extra possession in the first 56 minutes? Because without Lynch there are a LOT more three-and-outs from the Seahawks. There are other effects that Lynch running the ball has on the game outside of the Seahawks scoring...

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I think we have a different definition of quality.

I remember when everyone was up in arms in 2010 when I pointed out the offense got better statically when Finley went down.

You may be right. The defense may be worse. They also might benefit from raji being back and Hayward moving. Losing hawk is a bonus

There's this narrative that Hawk was terrible and just getting rid of him is a plus....I get that people didn't like the guy but that's just wrong. The guys that might replace Hawk are guys that a) couldn't beat him out last year or b) a fourth round rookie.

And I'm not sure what you're definition of quality is but I would really question it if it means you don't think Williams was a quality starting corner or House wasn't a quality backup corner. And it would be amazing if Raji could help the defense, it would also be a complete shock since Raji has been pretty much terrible since 2010 (that includes a contract year)...oh wait, he supposedly looked terrific in practice for a couple weeks....

 

[ivo610]

There's this narrative that Hawk was terrible and just getting rid of him is a plus....I get that people didn't like the guy but that's just wrong. The guys that might replace Hawk are guys that a) couldn't beat him out last year or b) a fourth round rookie.

And I'm not sure what you're definition of quality is but I would really question it if it means you don't think Williams was a quality starting corner or House wasn't a quality backup corner. And it would be amazing if Raji could help the defense, it would also be a complete shock since Raji has been pretty much terrible since 2010 (that includes a contract year)...oh wait, he supposedly looked terrific in practice for a couple weeks....

No I don't think tramon was a quality starter. When QBs threw towards him in coverage they had a 106.5 QB rating and he allowed 10 TDs. At 32 yrs old it's not hard to upgrade from tramon.

As far as Aj he has been regarded as one of the worst linebackers in the league for several years now. Even acme packer blog commented about how you struggle to justify giving him playing time. You saw him get less n less snaps as the season went on. An upgrade could easily be someone who didn't beat him out last season.

I bet you'll be really impressed when you see players doing better than the "quality" guys you talk up.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

No I don't think tramon was a quality starter. When QBs threw towards him in coverage they had a 106.5 QB rating and he allowed 10 TDs. At 32 yrs old it's not hard to upgrade from tramon.

As far as Aj he has been regarded as one of the worst linebackers in the league for several years now. Even acme packer blog commented about how you struggle to justify giving him playing time. You saw him get less n less snaps as the season went on. An upgrade could easily be someone who didn't beat him out last season.

I bet you'll be really impressed when you see players doing better than the "quality" guys you talk up.

You´re right about Tramon not having a good season in 2014 and it was probably time to move on from him (espeically for the money the Browns signed him for). There´s no denying it was the correct move to get rid of both Hawk and Jones.

IMO both positions haven´t been addressed adequately. While Thompson used the first two picks on cornerbacks none of them is best suited to play on the outside. It´s no secret that I´m not satisfied with the way TT has handled the ILB position for at least the last two years.

 

[Carl]

So you don't think the Packers might have been able to score an extra FG if the offense had been on the field for an extra possession in the first 56 minutes? Because without Lynch there are a LOT more three-and-outs from the Seahawks. There are other effects that Lynch running the ball has on the game outside of the Seahawks scoring...

So I guess in addition to allowing 0 points and forcing 4 turnovers, the defense should have shut down Lynch and forced more three and outs. That's highly unrealistic. The defense set up the offense plenty of times.

There's no way to look at the defense during those 56 minutes as anything but fantastic.

Plus, without analyzing the run plays, you cannot assume that ILB was the issue on them.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So I guess in addition to allowing 0 points and forcing 4 turnovers, the defense should have shut down Lynch and forced more three and outs. That's highly unrealistic. The defense set up the offense plenty of times.

There's no way to look at the defense during those 56 minutes as anything but fantastic.

Plus, without analyzing the run plays, you cannot assume that ILB was the issue on them.

I agree that the ILBs aren´t the only one to blame for the loss against the Seahawks. Let me ask you a question though:

Do you think the position needed an upgrade after last season??? IMO there´s no doubt the Packers have to get better play out of the inside linebackers. Did Thompson address the position adequately??? I honestly don´t think so.

 

[Mondio]

i would say i'm not happy either, but at what expense? I can say, that after watching the 2 people chosen first in this draft, I am a lot happier those guys are on our team than any of the guys available at ILB in the draft. I think they are better and will be better at their respective positions. The FA class of ILB's didn't get me too excited this year either. One guys seemed like a decent option and after quite a few weeks of sitting on the market, he went back to the team that he basically called his slave masters. Something tells me he preferred to go elsewhere but nobody was signing him. He took what he could get, i'm not exactly upset he's not here. They probably know something we don't.

 

[TJV]

I would feel better if Davon House had returned because he had experience on the outside, but IMO it was time to say goodbye to Tramon, Hawk and Jones. I don’t think Thompson should have overpaid House to stay – that would have been repeating the mistake he made with Hawk and Jones, for example. As far as letting Hawk go I do see it as a plus. An upgrade was necessary and saying others on the team couldn’t beat him out ignores the fact that Barrington, once given the chance, did take snaps from Hawk. The most important part of being a draft and develop team is developing young talent. And that includes cutting loose players on the downside of their careers like Tramon and Hawk. The downside of playing youngsters is their inexperience, but towards the end of this season I expect whoever takes Hawk’s snaps to be playing better than he did. At this point I hope they find a legit CB on the outside opposite Shields, but I don’t think the options of overpaying to keep Tramon around temporarily or House longer-term made sense.

 

[Carl]

I agree that the ILBs aren´t the only one to blame for the loss against the Seahawks. Let me ask you a question though:

Do you think the position needed an upgrade after last season??? IMO there´s no doubt the Packers have to get better play out of the inside linebackers. Did Thompson address the position adequately??? I honestly don´t think so.

I'd take it step further about the Seawahks game and say ILB was very low on the list of reasons they lost the game, if on the list at all.

Yes, the position does need an upgrade. As far as adequately, as of right now it doesn't look like it; however, we will have to wait and see how Ryan and other guys play to see how it turns out.

And considering TR drafts value before need, he clearly didn't find ILBs rated highly enough to take earlier so I can't blame him for not taking one higher.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

i would say i'm not happy either, but at what expense? I can say, that after watching the 2 people chosen first in this draft, I am a lot happier those guys are on our team than any of the guys available at ILB in the draft. I think they are better and will be better at their respective positions. The FA class of ILB's didn't get me too excited this year either. One guys seemed like a decent option and after quite a few weeks of sitting on the market, he went back to the team that he basically called his slave masters. Something tells me he preferred to go elsewhere but nobody was signing him. He took what he could get, i'm not exactly upset he's not here. They probably know something we don't.

I like both Randall and Rollins but I would have preferred Thompson to draft at least one true outside corner.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And considering TR drafts value before need, he clearly didn't find ILBs rated highly enough to take earlier so I can't blame him for not taking one higher.

I´m not criticizing Thompson for selecting players presenting more value based on the Packers board. He has to take some blame though for not upgrading the position over the last two offseasons as there are other ways aside of the draft to bring in talent as well.

 

[paulska]

I would feel better if Davon House had returned because he had experience on the outside, but IMO it was time to say goodbye to Tramon, Hawk and Jones. I don’t think Thompson should have overpaid House to stay – that would have been repeating the mistake he made with Hawk and Jones, for example. As far as letting Hawk go I do see it as a plus. An upgrade was necessary and saying others on the team couldn’t beat him out ignores the fact that Barrington, once given the chance, did take snaps from Hawk. The most important part of being a draft and develop team is developing young talent. And that includes cutting loose players on the downside of their careers like Tramon and Hawk. The downside of playing youngsters is their inexperience, but towards the end of this season I expect whoever takes Hawk’s snaps to be playing better than he did. At this point I hope they find a legit CB on the outside opposite Shields, but I don’t think the options of overpaying to keep Tramon around temporarily or House longer-term made sense.

My one concern with the decisions around the secondary echoes yours: many moons ago, Tramon Williams became one of the highest paid Packers after playing solid football for a limited stretch. Some people bemoaned that signing was premature (in hindsight, we could liken it to Brad Jones contract- flashing potential at a position where we needed quality of play, developed from within, etc), but Tramon was good value for his deal. He fell off somewhat towards the end of his time, but he was reliable and consistent for the most part without breaking the bank. Paying him more than he deserved up front in the early stages meant the back end of his deal was also more affordable, which was smart structuring- TT has been good along this line (think Woodson's deal- stupid money in year one made the remainder of the deal a tremendous bargain).

I would have liked to see Davon House offered Tramon's salary to stay. That gives us scheme familiarity and something more than potential on the outside. Joe Whitt has done really good work developing young talent in our secondary, and I think you have to trust that he gets Davon to play solidly like he has Sam and Tramon. If it's a whiff, then it's a whiff, but based on our track record, I like the probability that he performs well and delivers good value on the whole.

That said, it looks like TT felt the offer he got was past his value to the team. We'll see if that's true pretty quickly- CB tends to be one of those positions where a fatal flaw becomes apparent in about 15 minutes.

While Randall and Rollins appear to offer flexibility within the scheme, it seems to me that the best flexibility that maximizes the capability of our defense is in a player like Charles Woodson who can give you dominant reps from multiple spots. To a lesser degree, Peppers is like that because of his insane athleticism- he can play DE, DT in passing situations, OLB, ILB. He was a subtle yet important reason our defensive backbone stiffened last year. I don't know how quickly rookies can deliver within Capers' scheme. It's one more reason I'd hoped that House would give us a constant at an important position so some of out better players can be variables within the scheme other teams have to fret over, rather than be constants that are easier to prepare for because we've got variables (read: weaknesses) we have to cover for...

 

[Deleted member 6794]

My one concern with the decisions around the secondary echoes yours: many moons ago, Tramon Williams became one of the highest paid Packers after playing solid football for a limited stretch. Some people bemoaned that signing was premature (in hindsight, we could liken it to Brad Jones contract- flashing potential at a position where we needed quality of play, developed from within, etc), but Tramon was good value for his deal. He fell off somewhat towards the end of his time, but he was reliable and consistent for the most part without breaking the bank. Paying him more than he deserved up front in the early stages meant the back end of his deal was also more affordable, which was smart structuring- TT has been good along this line (think Woodson's deal- stupid money in year one made the remainder of the deal a tremendous bargain).

I would have liked to see Davon House offered Tramon's salary to stay. That gives us scheme familiarity and something more than potential on the outside. Joe Whitt has done really good work developing young talent in our secondary, and I think you have to trust that he gets Davon to play solidly like he has Sam and Tramon. If it's a whiff, then it's a whiff, but based on our track record, I like the probability that he performs well and delivers good value on the whole.

That said, it looks like TT felt the offer he got was past his value to the team. We'll see if that's true pretty quickly- CB tends to be one of those positions where a fatal flaw becomes apparent in about 15 minutes.

While Randall and Rollins appear to offer flexibility within the scheme, it seems to me that the best flexibility that maximizes the capability of our defense is in a player like Charles Woodson who can give you dominant reps from multiple spots. To a lesser degree, Peppers is like that because of his insane athleticism- he can play DE, DT in passing situations, OLB, ILB. He was a subtle yet important reason our defensive backbone stiffened last year. I don't know how quickly rookies can deliver within Capers' scheme. It's one more reason I'd hoped that House would give us a constant at an important position so some of out better players can be variables within the scheme other teams have to fret over, rather than be constants that are easier to prepare for because we've got variables (read: weaknesses) we have to cover for...

Tramon Williams was one of the starters in the Packers secondary when the Packers signed him to an extension during the 2010 season. House wasn´t able to grab one of the starting jobs during his four season with the team and missed several games with different injuries. I´m fine with Thompson not signing him to a contract averaging more than $6 million a year. I would have liked to replace both him and Williams with a true cover corner though.

Peppers is an athletic freak but he can´t play inside linebacker.

 

[AmishMafia]

I´m not criticizing Thompson for selecting players presenting more value based on the Packers board. He has to take some blame though for not upgrading the position over the last two offseasons as there are other ways aside of the draft to bring in talent as well.

Packers would be a much better team if TT would get a JJ Watt and a HOF LT. Just wanting it doesnt make it happen. The player has to actually exist, be available, want to play for GB, be at a reasonable price, not be a bad teammate, etc.

Improving the team is not just a simple decision that for some reason TT decides not to do.

Do you honestly think TT looked at the roster and said, "i know i could get player xxxx at a reasonable price and cut Jones, but nah. I drafted jones therefore im going to stick with him." I bet every FA each year is considered. Most arent upgrades, many arent Packer People, many are in the decline, some arent worth their asking price, and still more are not good teammates. Past that you have guys who dont want to play in GB or want to be near thwir families.

 

[paulska]

Tramon Williams was one of the starters in the Packers secondary when the Packers signed him to an extension during the 2010 season. House wasn´t able to grab one of the starting jobs during his four season with the team and missed several games with different injuries. I´m fine with Thompson not signing him to a contract averaging more than $6 million a year. I would have liked to replace both him and Williams with a true cover corner though.

Peppers is an athletic freak but he can´t play inside linebacker.

Not saying that Williams and House are analogous in the early parts of their careers, but they are similar in that both had only shown limited glimpses of consistency/potential before we made the decision to pay/not pay them big money. I clearly remember many wondering if TT had made a Jones-esque blunder in paying Tramon as much as we did. It did work out though.

I tend to agree that paying House what he got just to keep him may not have been good decision making. I just wonder if we had offered him more than we did earlier in the process might have kept him around. We'll never know now.

As for Peppers, I don't mean to say he can play ILB as a starter/regular, just that he has enough athleticism that he can play that role within our scheme in packages for sleight of hand purposes. Woodson was never big enough to start as an OLB, but because of his athleticism and size we could use him in situations in that role to effect. We didn't do it a lot, but when we did, it generally was effective because of his tremendous natural tools. I think Peppers is similar (though to a less dominant degree) in that respect.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Packers would be a much better team if TT would get a JJ Watt and a HOF LT. Just wanting it doesnt make it happen. The player has to actually exist, be available, want to play for GB, be at a reasonable price, not be a bad teammate, etc.

Improving the team is not just a simple decision that for some reason TT decides not to do.

Do you honestly think TT looked at the roster and said, "i know i could get player xxxx at a reasonable price and cut Jones, but nah. I drafted jones therefore im going to stick with him." I bet every FA each year is considered. Most arent upgrades, many arent Packer People, many are in the decline, some arent worth their asking price, and still more are not good teammates. Past that you have guys who dont want to play in GB or want to be near thwir families.

While there are for sure some players not wanting to play for the Packers and others asking for way too much money I honestly don't believe there wasn't a single opportunity to upgrade the position significantly over the last two years.