Packers hire Mike Pettine, defensive coordinator

[Pokerbrat2000]

cut him and save some money, now you have to replace him. Sure he's overpaid, and had he played last year like the previous year I'm sure they probably would be cutting him. But he did have a pretty decent year. Not 14 sacks and probowl year, but he was more active and important than his sack numbers tell you he was. He played well. Now last I looked at the FA list, which will change a lot by the time it matters, nothing got me too excited and to get someone that is going to be that 12-14 sack guy you're going to pay a lot more than what we're paying Matthews. I think on a decent team defense, using Matthews correctly, he's still around a 10 sack a year guy and his backside rushing defense is still very good. He has the effort and skill to still be a big part of this defense.

That brings up a very good point.

The firing of Capers and hiring of Pettine may save or cost a few guys on defense their jobs this year. I am guessing Pettine is spending quite a bit of time studying film and trying to decide if and how he will use the current group of players. He actually may have a lot of influence on whether a guy like Mathews will be in Green Bay next season.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I also view the decisions on Matthews, Cobb and Jordy a bit like the decision that the Packers were faced with Josh Sitton. Although Sitton had the added layer of a supposed locker room cancer. But I'm pretty sure that the Packers waited to determine if Taylor was going to be the guy who could adequately replace Sitton, before they decided 100% to cut him. Unless the Packers make bold big moves in Free Agency at OLB and/or WR, I see the same thing happening with those 3 players and the decision on what to do with them will wait until the Packers see if they have any capable replacements.

 

[Mondio]

I think any "big" moves will be at Oline or DB/Safety. Maybe WR if they end up cutting someone there. I just don't see much at OLB that makes me think they'll move on any of them as a drastic improvement over what we have.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

In Free Agency, I expect moves at TE, OL, CB, S,OLB and possibly at WR.

With maybe TE being the only "big" signing.

When was the last time the Packers signed a FA WR? Under TT, all I could find was Marc Boerigter (2006)

 

[PackerDNA]

I think any "big" moves will be at Oline or DB/Safety. Maybe WR if they end up cutting someone there. I just don't see much at OLB that makes me think they'll move on any of them as a drastic improvement over what we have.

Do you think they'll show any serious interest in Norwell?

 

[Mondio]

In Free Agency, I expect moves at TE, OL, CB, S,OLB and possibly at WR.

With maybe TE being the only "big" signing.

When was the last time the Packers signed a FA WR? Under TT, all I could find was Marc Boerigter (2006)

I forgot about TE, maybe because we seem to play without them lately

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I forgot about TE, maybe because we seem to play without them lately

Sadly, you are correct in "playing without them". However, I think Finley and Cook showed the value of what a good TE can give AR and the offense. If the Packers haven't learned it in house, they should be watching more film of their opponents and competition.

Would love to see a top 5 FA brought in at TE and then use a 3rd or 4th pick to replace Kendricks now or in 2019.

 

[Mondio]

Do you think they'll show any serious interest in Norwell?

Not sure, depends on what their plans are and availability at so many other places. But I de see a scenario or 2 where he is a legitimate target of ours. But probably not

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Do you think they'll show any serious interest in Norwell?

Not sure who you are asking but I saw this and immediately said "No way do the Packers even sniff him" to myself.

Spotrac

Market Value

5 years; $58,924,976

Average salary: $11,784,995

NFL Rank: No. 66

Guard Rank: No. 2

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

As much as I pissed and moaned about the depth on the OL last year, I really don't want to see the Packers use a #1 pick or break the bank in Free Agency on the Guard position. Look at what they got out of Evans this year for $2.25 M. I would rather add depth and sign 2-3 Jahri Evans kind of guys then bust it all out in one player.

 

[GleefulGary]

cut him and save some money, now you have to replace him. Sure he's overpaid, and had he played last year like the previous year I'm sure they probably would be cutting him. But he did have a pretty decent year. Not 14 sacks and probowl year, but he was more active and important than his sack numbers tell you he was. He played well. Now last I looked at the FA list, which will change a lot by the time it matters, nothing got me too excited and to get someone that is going to be that 12-14 sack guy you're going to pay a lot more than what we're paying Matthews. I think on a decent team defense, using Matthews correctly, he's still around a 10 sack a year guy and his backside rushing defense is still very good. He has the effort and skill to still be a big part of this defense.

Problem is most people measure impact based on stats, because, well...it's really all we have. For the average fan, of which I certainly am, we don't know their assignments, we just say he made a play or he didn't, he's good or bad...very little in-between. Anyways, my point is that for example, Blake Martinez had a great stats year based on tackles, but how often do we point to that being because of Kenny Clark, Mike Daniels and Lowry? How many sacks did other guys get because of interior push or because of Matthews? How many sacks did Matthews get because of other guys? Did Martinez filling the A-gap push the RB outside into the open arms of Matthews? These are things that we just don't look at, and don't have the film/knowledge to see either.

My point is simply that we shouldn't just use basic stats to say a guy is good or bad, there's so much we're missing. I'm really just adding on to what you said, because I think you're exactly right. Matthews was more active and important that his sack numbers tell you he was, you are exactly right. I just wanted to explain my point a little further and you had the perfect intro for it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Problem is most people measure impact based on stats, because, well...it's really all we have. For the average fan, of which I certainly am, we don't know their assignments, we just say he made a play or he didn't, he's good or bad...very little in-between. Anyways, my point is that for example, Blake Martinez had a great stats year based on tackles, but how often do we point to that being because of Kenny Clark, Mike Daniels and Lowry? How many sacks did other guys get because of interior push or because of Matthews? How many sacks did Matthews get because of other guys? Did Martinez filling the A-gap push the RB outside into the open arms of Matthews? These are things that we just don't look at, and don't have the film/knowledge to see either.

My point is simply that we shouldn't just use basic stats to say a guy is good or bad, there's so much we're missing. I'm really just adding on to what you said, because I think you're exactly right. Matthews was more active and important that his sack numbers tell you he was, you are exactly right. I just wanted to explain my point a little further and you had the perfect intro for it.

Agreed and this is why we all get paid nothing to evaluate talent for the Green Bay Packers.

 

[Mondio]

As much as I pissed and moaned about the depth on the OL last year, I really don't want to see the Packers use a #1 pick or break the bank in Free Agency on the Guard position. Look at what they got out of Evans this year for $2.25 M. I would rather add depth and sign 2-3 Jahri Evans kind of guys then bust it all out in one player.

I don't think there is much chance in investing that in a guard. Maybe more for a right tackle depending on some other things, but I'd be happy if Evans didn't retire and signed again for the same contract

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't think there is much chance in investing that in a guard. Maybe more for a right tackle depending on some other things, but I'd be happy if Evans didn't retire and signed again for the same contract

Agreed on Evans and the Guard position. What the Packers do will depend a lot on what they think of the young guys on the OL and Bulaga's status.

Right now the OL depth isn't where I would like it to be, but what do I know.

LT Bakhtiari, Murphy, Ulrick John, Adam Pankey
LG Taylor, Lucas Patrick
C Linsley, Justin McCray, Patrick
RG Justin McCray, Dillon Day
RT Bullaga, Spriggs, Murphy, John, Pankey

The good news for the Packers is that James Campen seems to be able to turn water into wine, so I am not too concerned about the OL.

oooops....just realized the thread title.....my bad!

 

[PackerDNA]

A young guy already on the roster who really intrigues me and IMO is worth keeping an eye on- Lucas Patrick. I think he could end up as another T.J. Lang.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Just to try using facts when they're available, he's missed 17 out of 144 regular season games, an average of 1/8, not 1/3.

I guess it seemed like he missed more, since you never heard his name called...

I have always been a big Clay Mathews fan. But he is getting paid von Miller money, and producing like a journeyman LB... for too long. The defense needs to be adjusted. And Mathews cap space is going to be needed to do that. Imo.

Capers asked him to do a lot of things, which hurt his stats and flash play potential. You got to respect that he did it selflessly. But he was getting paid well to do what he did. And I feel his money is better spent on cb or dline.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

That to me is the conundrum in a nutshell, "who do we replace him with?". Currently, the Packers do not have anyone on the roster that appears to be able to come close to beating Matthews out at the position. I'm sure every team can go down its current roster and find quite a few guys who are being overpaid (and underpaid), so do you cut every overpaid player and start over? Obviously, you have to consider the amount of $$ that the players is being overpaid by and where you are on your cap and depth behind said player. Matthews should only be cut if they can use the saved money to improve the position. But weakening the position just to save some cap money, doesn't make sense when your defense is already in need of improvement.

I'm not going to compare the stats. But you look at our two recent olb rookies. Fackrell, and biegel. Neither did much from what I remember. But extrapolated out, what is the tackle/sack production per snap played?

Dang it. Now I have to check.
Mathews 29 tackles, 8 sacks, 660 snaps.
Fackrell 20 tackles, 3 sacks 448 snaps.
Biegel 11 tackles 0 sacks 122 snaps

Looking at fackrell. He would have had 30 tackles and 4.5 sacks, theoretically. If he had Mathews 660 snaps instead of 448.

Fackrell made $748,512
Mathews made $15,075,000.
20X what fackrell made for 3.5 extra sacks.....

Another decent rookie, another free agent like Brooks was. Hope biegel takes the next step, and fackrell doesn't regress.... and we see if we can grab him back up after the market establishes his value maybe?

 

[GleefulGary]

You can't just look at sacks, tackles, etc and expect that to be the full picture. What about pressures? Creating sacks for other players? And what was the situation? It's so much more complex than we make it out to be.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Mathews should be released. He has been getting paid like 15 mil a year, and I remember just as many pathetic tackle attempts leading to big plays, as I do him making big plays.

Just for the record, Matthews is set to get paid $11.4 million as well as count the same amount against the cap next season. I agree that still makes him overpaid though.

The draft, free agency and trades are just ahead. That's how you replace people.

There's no guarantee the Packers would be able to adequately replace Matthews even by using all methods available for next season though.

I'm not going to compare the stats. But you look at our two recent olb rookies. Fackrell, and biegel. Neither did much from what I remember. But extrapolated out, what is the tackle/sack production per snap played?

Dang it. Now I have to check.
Mathews 29 tackles, 8 sacks, 660 snaps.
Fackrell 20 tackles, 3 sacks 448 snaps.
Biegel 11 tackles 0 sacks 122 snaps

Looking at fackrell. He would have had 30 tackles and 4.5 sacks, theoretically. If he had Mathews 660 snaps instead of 448.

Fackrell made $748,512
Mathews made $15,075,000.
20X what fackrell made for 3.5 extra sacks.....

Another decent rookie, another free agent like Brooks was. Hope biegel takes the next step, and fackrell doesn't regress.... and we see if we can grab him back up after the market establishes his value maybe?

As several other posters have pointed out it's impossible to fairly evaluate the performance of an edge rusher by solely taking a look at the total number of sacks.

FWIW PFF graded Matthews (83.4) as an above average player while Fackrell (58.8) performed at a poor level according to them.

 

[PackerDNA]

There's never any 'guarantees'-other than doing nothing guarantees nothing will be done. But the tools are there to try.

 

[GBkrzygrl]

Would love to see a top 5 FA brought in at TE and then use a 3rd or 4th pick to replace Kendricks now or in 2019.

I would still be willing to hang in there with Kendricks. I wonder if they didn't put him in the game plan very much because they were focused on Bennett.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

You can't just look at sacks, tackles, etc and expect that to be the full picture. What about pressures? Creating sacks for other players? And what was the situation? It's so much more complex than we make it out to be.

Completely agree. But it is a strong indicator...

If I had to throw a wrench in the gears though. I'd say Clark was the main reason our defenses progressed on any level.

Which is what I was complaining about since the Raji island debate... get rid of one of the expensive olbs, and buy a good dlineman to help Daniels and Clark out. And put the rest of the saved cap space towards a cb. ... it's a must.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Just for the record, Matthews is set to get paid $11.4 million as well as count the same amount against the cap next season. I agree that still makes him overpaid though.



There's no guarantee the Packers would be able to adequately replace Matthews even by using all methods available for next season though.



As several other posters have pointed out it's impossible to fairly evaluate the performance of an edge rusher by solely taking a look at the total number of sacks.

FWIW PFF graded Matthews (83.4) as an above average player while Fackrell (58.8) performed at a poor level according to them.

Mathews is good. I guess I was more tuned into what he made last year, to realize Thompson front loaded his contract. 11.4 mil, with no dead cap space if I remember right...
Fackrell was a disappointment last year. So it's a terrible sign that their stats could even be comparable...

What this defense needs is serious dline infusion. That will cause the ripple effect to make the lbs effective. All of which is needed to give our secondary some chance to be successful.

When you have haha in zone nearly every play, and Burnett playing lb to help slow the secondary from bleeding out... there's a problem... and when Daniels or Clark get hurt, and all these lbs we invested in ,disappear while the opposing offenses steamroll us.

My round about way of saying we need a scheme change that allows the lbs to make plays, instead of depending on them making plays...

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

The defenses in the championship round had much more 4 man fronts than I remember seeing in a long time. Jags. Eagles, MN... Even if one was a olb, it seemed like the top defenses this year all had those four guys down in the dirt getting pressure.

Is this the trend back to 4-3 style defenses ,showing strength?

I strongly believe our current defense could be great with the vikes dline or the eagles dline. Daniels/Clark combo playing at full strength are a couple of corner stones. You have to hope lowry , Adams, progress. But besides the cornerstones and a pocket full of hope. We have nothing... 4 Dlinemen. That's it.....

I want a dline so good that we have no choice but to have 3 on the field at all times. If we accomplish that, the lbs and secondary will look great.

We can't afford Burnett. There's only about 10 mil usable cap space. And that's using up every dollar.... so free agents, our own free agents, and future cap carry over to "build" instead of maintain Thompson's vision...... not possible.

I suspect there will be a purge. There has to be.

 

[Mondio]

1 punt, 2 turnovers and the most yards every in any game. I wouldn't say the defenses were on display. We would have fit right in in that Super Bowl.