Packers tried to trade for Jonathan Taylor

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yup, in a case like Mahomes you essentially hitch your financial means to one guy immensely for four years or so - chew down that guaranteed money massively and hope he doesn't get hurt. If he stays healthy four years - you can look at him and his agent and re-do or by then if things keep appreciating able to tell him see this contract has now given us the ability to go surround you as you get older, but you're still getting a ton of money...and truthfully they could do a restructure to bring down his dead cap each year but add guarantee he may not have any longer....lot they can do.

Likewise, let's live in a world where Love truthfully LIGHTS UP 2023...maybe not MVP level but dude is immediately Top 10 in the league and you know you have your future. I wouldn't be against GB doing something similar but not quite for 10 years...tell Russ lets build something to 7 years average at $45M a year which is $315M dollars. If you did same percent guaranteed you're looking at $99M total guaranteed and roughly $44M guaranteed at signing.

You could essentially do a similar thing just slightly more compressed and you'd be hitching to Love now at Mahomes-esq type level before he truly proves he is Mahomes caliber (but we are talking four years ago at this point Mahomes deal).

Just living in a world I hope we have to contemplate.

Agreed. While any contract can be renegotiated, Mahomes gives you plenty of wiggle room, in the future, if everyone decides that it is in the best interest of the team to make some cap space with pushing his money out. With contracts like Rodgers, Bahk and Aaron Jones, that wiggle room was/is all but gone.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

With JT on the PUP list this still has time to play out. Something not mentioned is the Colts would probably want to know what it would cost to sign Dillon before agreeing to a trade. The difference in salaries could effect the draft capital in the trade. Of course this is all IMO.

Most definitely a consideration. The Colts wouldn't want Dillon if he was 1 and done. I think the difficult part with a new contract for him, just how much is he worth if he becomes the #1 RB on your team?

 

[tynimiller]

Agreed. While any contract can be renegotiates, Mahomes gives you plenty of wiggle room, in the future, if everyone decides that it is in the best interest of the team to make some cap space with pushing his money out. With contracts like Rodgers, Bahk and Aaron Jones, that wiggle room was/is all but gone.

Personally...one has to consider also what is riskier...shorter but more guaranteed and risk it or longer and less but play the shell game....

Example...let's say we want to resign Dillon and he wants to be here....which is better:

3 years $9M fully guaranteed and Dillon knows team has no benefit to cut vs keep him...

or a deal like Jamaal Williams got:

3 Years $12M and only $8.15M guaranteed and the team clearly just can cut after one.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Personally...one has to consider also what is riskier...shorter but more guaranteed and risk it or longer and less but play the shell game....

Example...let's say we want to resign Dillon and he wants to be here....which is better:

3 years $9M fully guaranteed and Dillon knows team has no benefit to cut vs keep him...

or a deal like Jamaal Williams got:

3 Years $12M and only $8.15M guaranteed and the team clearly just can cut after one.

Obviously, it is player dependent, on both sides of the decision. If I am a RB, I'm taking as much guaranteed money as I can get. Their careers can end on one carry.

 

[tynimiller]

Obviously, it is player dependent, on both sides of the decision. If I am a RB, I'm taking as much guaranteed money as I can get. Their careers can end on one carry.

Yup! I'm just very shocked we haven't seen such things....a player like Dillon that LOVES where they are, plays a riskier position, is solid but not all pro....you tell me I'm pretty much guaranteed to make "x" and a team is likely to keep me vs "x+20%" but only if I stay on the roster despite the team having a massive savings to cut me or constructed their contract in a way they know that three year deal was a two.

 

[OldSchool101]

I agree. Working the guaranteed $ is essentially determining term length
Unless of course that team wants to pay me not to play? Which I’d be totally fine with that scenario if cut.
But yeah, guaranteed is really all that matters and it essentially lets you work the bath mackwards

 

[Schultz]

ESPN is now reporting that the Colts wanted Waddle from the Fins, Watson from the Pack. Both teams shut them down immediately, as they should. GB offered draft compensation only. It must not have been much as the Colts cut off talks immediately also.

 

[ClutchLove]

Watson out AGAIN...

So I stand corrected that I'd rather have an available JT then him at this point I mean JT is on PUP - but at least there is some somewhat *definitive* timetable for him to return...

 

[Dantés]

I still say no to trading Watson, easily. But I do think the Pack should take another run at Taylor.

 

[GreenNGold_81]

I still say no to trading Watson, easily. But I do think the Pack should take another run at Taylor.

I agree, but I'm wondering what it will take. Obviously, if they'll take a 2nd rounder and ?Bak then I say do it.

 

[Firethorn1001]

I'm wondering what it will take. Obviously, if they'll take a 2nd rounder and ?Bak then I say do it.

Dead cap hit aside for the Packers, not sure why they would want Bak.

Sounds like the Colts want a little less now from what I read. Best bet might be to get the Jets pick out of escrow, firm up the 2nd and use that for an offer.

 

[longtimefan]

I still say no to trading Watson, easily. But I do think the Pack should take another run at Taylor.

Sorry to say but Dillion can’t be what this offense needs

 

[milani]

Sorry to say but Dillion can’t be what this offense needs

You are correct. He is a role player. Not a feature back.

 

[Dantés]

I agree, but I'm wondering what it will take. Obviously, if they'll take a 2nd rounder and ?Bak then I say do it.

No one is trading for Bakh.

The Browns got a 1st for Trent Richardson, but he had only used up one year of his rookie deal and people still thought he was good.

The Niners traded a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th for McCaffrey, but he’s a better player.

I would guess a 2nd and 4th if the Colts are actually motivated to move him.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You are correct. He is a role player. Not a feature back.

Agree. If nothing else comes from the injury to Aaron Jones, maybe the Packers, other teams and Dillon himself, see this. Might make him easier and cheaper to resign to another contract, if that is what both sides end up wanting. Don't get me wrong, I like Dillon, but only at the right price.

 

[gopkrs]

imho Dillon could be very good but needs a better run blocking line. No matter how big he is; he is not going anywhere when these bigger guys on D are able to hit him early. So don't really like him much for us right now nor for pounding for first downs.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

imho Dillon could be very good but needs a better run blocking line. No matter how big he is; he is not going anywhere when these bigger guys on D are able to hit him early. So don't really like him much for us right now nor for pounding for first downs.

I was actually quite pleased with the OL yesterday, except for the penalties. With 2 of their best players not playing, they did a pretty decent job of giving Love a lot of time and only allowed 1 sack. As far as run blocking goes, yeah, they miss Jenkins and Bahk, but Dillon doesn't have that ability to change directions like Aaron Jones gives you.

Maybe what you are saying is if the Packers had a run oriented offense, with an OL that could consistently mow people down, he would thrive? I would agree, but that really isn't the way the Packers have operated in quite a long time.

Something seems off with Dillon this season. Maybe it is the OL, but he is only averaging 2.7 yds a carry and in his previous 3 seasons, he was always above 4. Could be as @milani pointed out, he just isn't a feature back.

 

[gopkrs]

"Maybe what you are saying"?? Not sure why you need to guess what I was saying since it is very clear what I said. And I did not say anything about pass blocking. And I don't think our run blocking is appreciably better with Bak. Probably some with Jenkins, but not enough to really help out Dillon like he needs imho.

 

[milani]

Agree. If nothing else comes from the injury to Aaron Jones, maybe the Packers, other teams and Dillon himself, see this. Might make him easier and cheaper to resign to another contract, if that is what both sides end up wanting. Don't get me wrong, I like Dillon, but only at the right price.

Sometimes I wish we could make him into a John Kuhn.

 

[Dantés]

I don't think that Dillon is physical enough to make a good fullback. He's built like one, but he tries to play like a much smaller back. He's just betwixt and between in general and it renders him pretty ineffective. I know people have said the run blocking isn't good enough for him, and I'm not saying it's been good, but explosive runners can make blocking look better by exploding to and through the hole much faster.

 

[milani]

I was actually quite pleased with the OL yesterday, except for the penalties. With 2 of their best players not playing, they did a pretty decent job of giving Love a lot of time and only allowed 1 sack. As far as run blocking goes, yeah, they miss Jenkins and Bahk, but Dillon doesn't have that ability to change directions like Aaron Jones gives you.

Maybe what you are saying is if the Packers had a run oriented offense, with an OL that could consistently mow people down, he would thrive? I would agree, but that really isn't the way the Packers have operated in quite a long time.

Something seems off with Dillon this season. Maybe it is the OL, but he is only averaging 2.7 yds a carry and in his previous 3 seasons, he was always above 4. Could be as @milani pointed out, he just isn't a feature back.

We do not run well outside. Either our TEs are not getting out there on the edge or teams do not fear the run up the middle and are cheating to the outside.

 

[milani]

I don't think that Dillon is physical enough to make a good fullback. He's built like one, but he tries to play like a much smaller back. He's just betwixt and between in general and it renders him pretty ineffective. I know people have said the run blocking isn't good enough for him, and I'm not saying it's been good, but explosive runners can make blocking look better by exploding to and through the hole much faster.

Probably. Although we have had only one bona-fide FB since Kuhn. The others were not any bigger than Dillon.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Just an observation. Dillon ran into a pile (the bulk of the time) standing near vertical. In most instances he was stopped near immediate and often he would slow down before contact. The only time I remember him leaning into anyone and sticking it to them was on a very short yardage play (and he got an extra yard) He was running way too upright and enough a novice like me noticed it. Several times he didn’t get touched for near 2 yards and then he slows down and is very vertical and gets stopped on those plays for no YAC.
Other RB’s put their heads down and get that extra tough yard or two. There’s absolutely 0 reason he should get stopped on a dime weighing 250lbs unless he’s too upright or hitting a 275+ pound player coming downhill or both.

Agree. I like Dillon as a change of pace back, when AJ is healthy and able to stretch and spread the defense. Besides Jordan Loves scrambles yesterday, the Packers run game was pathetic. Granted, New Orleans has a very good front 7, but running Dillon straight up the middle, that isn't going to work 9 times out of 10 against them. I don't remember Dillon catching a ball yesterday either, did they run any screens to him?

 

[milani]

Agree. I like Dillon as a change of pace back, when AJ is healthy and able to stretch and spread the defense. Besides Jordan Loves scrambles yesterday, the Packers run game was pathetic. Granted, New Orleans has a very good front 7, but running Dillon straight up the middle, that isn't going to work 9 times out of 10 against them. I don't remember Dillon catching a ball yesterday either, did they run any screens to him?

I do recall him catching one pass on the outside.

 

[OldSchool101]

Agree. I like Dillon as a change of pace back, when AJ is healthy and able to stretch and spread the defense. Besides Jordan Loves scrambles yesterday, the Packers run game was pathetic. Granted, New Orleans has a very good front 7, but running Dillon straight up the middle, that isn't going to work 9 times out of 10 against them. I don't remember Dillon catching a ball yesterday either, did they run any screens to him?

Yes. He had that lateral play but it was behind LOS so it counted as a 14 yard run