Guess who leads the NFL in Interceptions?

[Pokerbrat2000]

Are we back to the Sitton thing again? lol. Taylor's play and the Cap savings makes cutting Sitton palatable, but I still had and still have an issue with the fact that TT lost a potential decent draft pick by not trading Sitton. At least with letting Hayward walk, the Packers should get a compensatory pick for him.

 

[swhitset]

Are we back to the Sitton thing again? lol. Taylor's play and the Cap savings makes cutting Sitton palatable, but I still had and still have an issue with the fact that TT lost a potential decent draft pick by not trading Sitton. At least with letting Hayward walk, the Packers should get a compensatory pick for him.

Why not lol it's been 13 or 14 weeks since they cut him.... we may as well start arguing again. I agree it would have been nice to have gotten something in trade for Sitton, but ultimately, I just don't think it's that big of a deal. I don't think we would have gotten better than a 4th or 5th round pick anyway, and I don't place as high a value on those as Ted does lol. However I do agree that it would have been preferable to getting nothing.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Why not lol it's been 13 or 14 weeks since they cut him.... we may as well start arguing again. I agree it would have been nice to have gotten something in trade for Sitton, but ultimately, I just don't think it's that big of a deal. I don't think we would have gotten better than a 4th or 5th round pick anyway, and I don't place as high a value on those as Ted does lol. However I do agree that it would have been preferable to getting nothing.

The Devil is in the Details.....no matter how valuable that 4th or 5th could have been and I am not going to go cherry pick all the ultra successful picks in those rounds, to make you list all the busts, it is the one aspect of the move that I think was a preventable failure.

 

[Mondio]

It would have, but considering guys like Revis and Demarcus Ware get cut with no compensation, i'm not sure what the value in sitton would have been. There's little doubt the Packers had the benefit of his best and most productive years. He's a big guy, that kudos to him finished the past couple seasons thru foot and back injuries, but he was still being hurt. I don't know if other teams would have been big on giving up anything. Once a big older guy who's on the down side is being shopped for trade, other teams know he's likely to be cut, especially when there are other steps being taken with that team to bolster the Oline. Even if they can offer a better contract, they can offer it without giving up a pick too.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The downside would have been lesscap space while having Hyde and Rollins on the roster capable of playing in the slot.

For having a proven corner at a terrific value that can't be really classified as "downside". Especially since Casey is MUCH better in the slot than either Hyde or Rollins.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Let's get even more real lol.... Sitton missed several games due to injury while Taylor was on the field playing. I think that balances things out fairly well. Beyond that, I would say that, while as you say, Sitton may be still be the better player, the gap is no longer as wide as it once was, and Sitton's career is past its Apex while Taylor may still get better. All in all cutting Sitton has not been a disaster for the Packers.

There's absolutely no doubt that Sitton is significantly better blocking for the run than Taylor. I agree the move hasn't resulted in a disaster for the Packers though.

For having a proven corner at a terrific value that can't be really classified as "downside". Especially since Casey is MUCH better in the slot than either Hyde or Rollins.

Hayward wasn't any better than Hyde or Rollins over his last three years with the Packers though. Therefore it was the right move to let him walk away at the time the decision had to be made.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

For having a proven corner at a terrific value that can't be really classified as "downside". Especially since Casey is MUCH better in the slot than either Hyde or Rollins.

Again, it feels like you are looking at the situation now and not then, when the Packers had to make their decision not to give Heyward the kind of money that the Chargers did. I would imagine if the Packers felt Hayward's services and the money he was commanding was worth it at the time, they would have kept him. Based on fan reaction to the money paid to Jones, Perry and Starks on their resignings, as well as most of the comments on why letting Hayward walk was fine, had TT matched the Chargers offer, there would have been grumbling over that as well.

Sure if you could use hindsight and plug in the stats Hayward has this year, he would have been an excellent resign. However, had he gotten injured or played similar to his other 4 years in GB, not so much.

Another way to look at it, if you were TT and you could resign Hayward this offseason, would you pay him the kind of money his stats are reflecting this year?

 

[Half Empty]

So, sometimes a personnel move works out, sometimes it doesn't?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

So, sometimes a personnel move works out, sometimes it doesn't?

With no clear cut formula of determining how it may or may not work out, calculated risks. It is one of the key ingredients that separates the good teams from the bad teams.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Hayward wasn't any better than Hyde or Rollins over his last three years with the Packers though. Therefore it was the right move to let him walk away at the time the decision had to be made.

In his rookie season, Hayward was MUCH better than either Hyde or Rollins has ever been. Hayward was injured his second season and then played about as well as Hyde has played at his best. Again, I'm not saying that Hayward is a guaranteed elite, shut-down corner, I'm saying he's FAR better than a $5mn/year corner. The value is what makes him not being re-signed a mistake.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Again, it feels like you are looking at the situation now and not then, when the Packers had to make their decision not to give Heyward the kind of money that the Chargers did. I would imagine if the Packers felt Hayward's services and the money he was commanding was worth it at the time, they would have kept him. Based on fan reaction to the money paid to Jones, Perry and Starks on their resignings, as well as most of the comments on why letting Hayward walk was fine, had TT matched the Chargers offer, there would have been grumbling over that as well.

Sure if you could use hindsight and plug in the stats Hayward has this year, he would have been an excellent resign. However, had he gotten injured or played similar to his other 4 years in GB, not so much.

Another way to look at it, if you were TT and you could resign Hayward this offseason, would you pay him the kind of money his stats are reflecting this year?

No, i think people are forgetting how cheap Hayward signed for. Hayward's average per year is 32nd among corners in the league. People also forget how absolutely amazing Hayward was in his rookie season with the Packers. He was injured for his second season and then just a good corner his third/fourth seasons. Even if you want to say that his rookie season was an absolute fluke, then his level of play for such a young player was absolutely worth $5mn a year; it was also likely that he would improve since he was still young.

Again, if I was saying the Packers shouldn't have let him walk because he was obviously going to be an elite corner then I would be using hindsight. I'm simply saying that letting a young, good corner walk for $5m a year is a mistake, especially when that corner has shown he has the ability to be an elite player. Nick Perry was brought back for $5mn a year and he has never shown himself to be as good as Hayward.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

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

 

[Deleted member 6794]

In his rookie season, Hayward was MUCH better than either Hyde or Rollins has ever been. Again, I'm not saying that Hayward is a guaranteed elite, shut-down corner, I'm saying he's FAR better than a $5mn/year corner. The value is what makes him not being re-signed a mistake.

I agree that Hayward performed on a high level during his rookie season but that was three years before the Packers had to make a decision on re-signing him. After that he was average at best and struggled mightily lining up on the perimeter resulting in a rookie starting ahead of him last season. With Hyde and Rollins capable of playing in the slot and limited cap space available there was no reason to re-sign for $5 million a year. BTW Hayward will never turn into an elite shut down corner as he doesn't excel at playing on the outside.

Even if you want to say that his rookie season was an absolute fluke, then his level of play for such a young player was absolutely worth $5mn a year; it was also likely that he would improve since he was still young.

Again, if I was saying the Packers shouldn't have let him walk because he was obviously going to be an elite corner then I would be using hindsight.

Unfortunately there was no indication that Hayward would still improve as he had regressed since his rookie season.

Maybe you can show me a post in which you advocated for the Packers to re-sign Hayward before the start of free agency. Otherwise you're using hindsight to question the move.

 

[PikeBadger]

The downside would have been lesscap space while having Hyde and Rollins on the roster capable of playing in the slot.



As you've probably realized I've been critical of Thompson when thinking it was justified. I agree that the Packers made several questionable roster decisions this season but don't think Hayward was one of them.



Let's be real here for a moment. While Taylor has performed on a decent level, especially in pass protection, there's no doubt Sitton has been the better player this season not allowing a single sack or quarterback hit so far.

So what?!

Our o-line has probably been the most consistent and best position group on the team this year. Taylor has been plenty good enough. Getting rid of Sitton allowed Bakhtiari to be re-signed. I fully expect for the team to allow Lang to walk after this season. Would be very surprised if the Packers make a serious effort to re-sign him.

 

[PikeBadger]

The Devil is in the Details.....no matter how valuable that 4th or 5th could have been and I am not going to go cherry pick all the ultra successful picks in those rounds, to make you list all the busts, it is the one aspect of the move that I think was a preventable failure.

I agree. It was possibly preventable. I think they should have tried to trade Sitton during the draft (and they may actually have shopped him, how are we to know?).

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree. It was possibly preventable. I think they should have tried to trade Sitton during the draft (and they may actually have shopped him, how are we to know?).

You are right, the only thing we know for sure is that the Packers tried to shop Sitton right before the final cuts and didn't find a trade partner, everything else beyond that is speculation. Just felt like a last minute decision, that should have been made much sooner, to afford a better chance of actually trading a pretty decent player for something of value.

 

[PikeBadger]

You are right, the only thing we know for sure is that the Packers tried to shop Sitton right before the final cuts and didn't find a trade partner, everything else beyond that is speculation. Just felt like a last minute decision, that should have been made much sooner, to afford a better chance of actually trading a pretty decent player for something of value.

It's also very possible that they didn't shop Sitton during the draft because they weren't convinced they had a replacement ready yet. These are important details we aren't privy to unless word leaks out and 1265 Lombardi is not a leaky ship. Maybe some one in mgmt will leave town and McGinn will be able to pry some info out of them. That's our best chance to get info imo. Thompson doesn't strike me as a guy that's going to write his memoirs after he leaves.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Our o-line has probably been the most consistent and best position group on the team this year. Taylor has been plenty good enough. Getting rid of Sitton allowed Bakhtiari to be re-signed. I fully expect for the team to allow Lang to walk after this season. Would be very surprised if the Packers make a serious effort to re-sign him.

It's true that the offensive line has been the most consistent position group this season but there's no doubt the run blocking would be better with Sitton still on the team. I agree Thompson's decision to go with Taylor worked out pretty well though.