Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Honest positional needs
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 812244"><p>I can't agree with all of that but I like the general direction. A couple of notes:</p><p></p><p>The only reason Amari Cooper is under a $5.7 mil per year contract is because it is his rookie deal under the salary scale. Dallas inherited Oakland's 5th. year option exercise for next season at $14 mil. There isn't any reason to believe a comparable player at this age would be any less than 8 figures per year in a second contract. I like the idea, though. A young, productive guy with slot/wide flexibility as is Adams. The ability to move these guys around to exploit matchups adds another dimension. However, I'm not sure this is the best position to be dropping a big bag of cash if a comparable player is available.</p><p></p><p>Small/quick/fast isn't assigned much value in the draft, Lockett in the 3rd. round and Tyreek Hill in the 5th, to take two examples. Everybody wants the big receivers, the Packers perhaps more than others given current roster composition. Even in free agency, the small productive slots don't draw big coin as the NE parade of players illustrates. From a moneyball perspective, there does appear to be a market inefficiency here. Identifying an undervalued player in this mold in the 3rd. - 5th. round who can also solve the dismal punt return game would be a plus.</p><p></p><p>I don't like the idea of Matthews at ILB. He might be an upgrade compared to incumbents but he's not really a solution to anything. I've mentioned this on numerous occasions but it bears repeating: in his previous foray at ILB he went 2 consecutive games without making a tackle which seems impossible. Whatever improvemnt in run defense may have been observed while he was in there is likely cooincidence. We'd have to go back and see if that was a function of bad rushing opposition, but I'm not going to bother. The problem remains the same, the one Jones and then Burks were drafted to solve--adding speed at the position. Martinez is fine playing the short zones, but that's as far as it goes, and Matthews is not the guy he once was in quickness or speed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 812244"] I can't agree with all of that but I like the general direction. A couple of notes: The only reason Amari Cooper is under a $5.7 mil per year contract is because it is his rookie deal under the salary scale. Dallas inherited Oakland's 5th. year option exercise for next season at $14 mil. There isn't any reason to believe a comparable player at this age would be any less than 8 figures per year in a second contract. I like the idea, though. A young, productive guy with slot/wide flexibility as is Adams. The ability to move these guys around to exploit matchups adds another dimension. However, I'm not sure this is the best position to be dropping a big bag of cash if a comparable player is available. Small/quick/fast isn't assigned much value in the draft, Lockett in the 3rd. round and Tyreek Hill in the 5th, to take two examples. Everybody wants the big receivers, the Packers perhaps more than others given current roster composition. Even in free agency, the small productive slots don't draw big coin as the NE parade of players illustrates. From a moneyball perspective, there does appear to be a market inefficiency here. Identifying an undervalued player in this mold in the 3rd. - 5th. round who can also solve the dismal punt return game would be a plus. I don't like the idea of Matthews at ILB. He might be an upgrade compared to incumbents but he's not really a solution to anything. I've mentioned this on numerous occasions but it bears repeating: in his previous foray at ILB he went 2 consecutive games without making a tackle which seems impossible. Whatever improvemnt in run defense may have been observed while he was in there is likely cooincidence. We'd have to go back and see if that was a function of bad rushing opposition, but I'm not going to bother. The problem remains the same, the one Jones and then Burks were drafted to solve--adding speed at the position. Martinez is fine playing the short zones, but that's as far as it goes, and Matthews is not the guy he once was in quickness or speed. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
First Round Prospect Discussions Specifically
Latest: OldSchool101
14 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2025 Draft in Green Bay
Latest: Thirteen Below
31 minutes ago
Draft Talk
R
State of our former QB, Aaron Rodgers
Latest: rmontro
Today at 9:27 PM
Aaron Rodgers Discusson
S
Who Plans on Attending the Draft?
Latest: Schultz
Today at 8:35 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Lazard Situation...
Latest: tynimiller
Today at 8:18 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Honest positional needs
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
