What do we know?

[Ace]

I really think the Packers should concentrate on upgrading the defense. The offense will be great once again.

Anyone who doesn't think this really isn't watching. I'd be fine if they went defense with every pick this year and maybe 1 OLineman for depth.

 

[PikeBadger]

I think there is a good chance they'll draft a QB,TE,RB as well as an OL.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think there is a good chance they'll draft a QB,TE,RB as well as an OL.

TE is the only position on offense needing an upgrade. It's possible the Packers will draft several players on that side of the ball but they better address the needs on defense first.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

Methinks you forgot the Golden Rule: thou shalt not sign a Pats cast-off...

His option wasn't picked-up due salary.

 

[andeftw]

His option wasn't picked-up due salary.

His option wasn't picked up due to his salary being too high for what he can give you at this point in his career. Is he willing to take what the Redskins are paying Knighton?
Also, signing Wilfork would mean one less compensatory pick next year.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

His option wasn't picked-up due salary.

Which is the same thing as cutting a guy with no guaranteed money. If the Pats wanted him, they would have picked up the option it renegotiated the deal.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Which is the same thing as cutting a guy with no guaranteed money. If the Pats wanted him, they would have picked up the option it renegotiated the deal.

It seems like the Patriots are still interested in bringing him back but they didn't want to pay the $4 million bonus he was on Tuesday.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

It seems like the Patriots are still interested in bringing him back but they didn't want to pay the $4 million bonus he was on Tuesday.

They might be but the reports all indicate that Wilfork has offers from other teams that exceed $5m. Many of the guys the Pats have let go and others have regretted signing were probably guys the Pats would have brought back for cheaper deals. If the Pats don't think he's worth $4m then I don't know why anyone would think he's worth that or more.

 

[bubba]

Baltimore just signed an UFA leaving us as the only team in the NFL that hasn't. Not complaining just stating a fact. In my opinion we have signed 2 of the best in Cobb and Balauga.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

They might be but the reports all indicate that Wilfork has offers from other teams that exceed $5m. Many of the guys the Pats have let go and others have regretted signing were probably guys the Pats would have brought back for cheaper deals. If the Pats don't think he's worth $4m then I don't know why anyone would think he's worth that or more.

The Patriots were some millions over the cap and had to get under it by Tuesday. They saved $8 million by not picking up the option on Wilfork.

I know the Patriots don't let go of productive players but there were some other factors figuring into this decision.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

His option wasn't picked up due to his salary being too high for what he can give you at this point in his career. Is he willing to take what the Redskins are paying Knighton?
Also, signing Wilfork would mean one less compensatory pick next year.

I'm fine with exchanging a compensatory pick, which at this point might be a 6th or 7th rounder since the Packers have only lost Davon House, for a proven defensive tackle. Since the Packers resigned Cobb and Bulaga, any compensatory pick gained in 2016 wouldn't in the 3rd or 4th round.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm fine with exchanging a compensatory pick, which at this point might be a 6th or 7th rounder since the Packers have only lost Davon House, for a proven defensive tackle. Since the Packers resigned Cobb and Bulaga, any compensatory pick gained in 2016 wouldn't in the 3rd or 4th round.

Re-signing Cobb and Bulaga won't have any influence on the 2016 compensatory picks, losing House should at least result in a fifth rounder for the Packers.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

Re-signing Cobb and Bulaga won't have any influence on the 2016 compensatory picks, losing should at least result in a fifth rounder for the Packers.

It makes a difference for the equation of: Players you lose being greater than the players the gain. The better the players you lose (i.e. negligible due to the resigning of the Packers top two free-agents) won't be too much greater than the players gained.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It makes a difference for the equation of: Players you lose being greater than the players the gain. The better the players you lose (i.e. negligible due to the resigning of the Packers top two free-agents) won't be too much greater than the players gained.

That only applies for unrestricted free agents the Packers sign from other teams.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

That only applies for unrestricted free agents the Packers sign from other teams.

I think we're saying the same thing. Since the Packers won't be losing their best unrestricted free agents, the compensatory gained from losing House or Kuhn or Raji would not a "high compensatory pick".

It would be like: If the Packers lost Cobb, but signed Suh, the Packers wouldn't get a compensatory pick.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think we're saying the same thing. Since the Packers won't be losing their best unrestricted free agents, the compensatory gained from losing House or Kuhn or Raji would not a "high compensatory pick".

It would be like: If the Packers lost Cobb, but signed Suh, the Packers wouldn't get a compensatory pick.

Well, House signed for $6.25 million per season, so I expect to get either a fourth or fifth round compensatory pick for him if we don't sign any UFAs from other teams.

You're right that losing Cobb would have probably resulted in a third round pick.

 

[PackerDNA]

I always looked at the highest comp pick as a high 4th rounder.
Or very late 3rd.

 

[RRyder]

I always looked at the highest comp pick as a high 4th rounder.
Or very late 3rd.

Comp picks are allways at the end of the round they're givin in and 3rd round Is the highest that can be handed out so picking at the very end of the 3rd is highest comp pick a team can get

 

[Poppa San]

Comp picks are allways at the end of the round they're givin in and 3rd round Is the highest that can be handed out so picking at the very end of the 3rd is highest comp pick a team can get

So currently Detroit can salivate over wasting the 97th pick in 2016 for Suh. I think his pay is part of the formula. What else is included? If he breaks a nail in camp and sits out all season, will that lower their comp pick?

 

[HardRightEdge]

Who was out there on 3rd down this year? I honest don't remeber

After the bye, in nickel, it was mostly Barrington and Matthews. In dime I think it was probably Barrington more than anybody else. If you're talking about short yardage/base D, it was mostly Barrington and Hawk.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Anyone who doesn't think this really isn't watching. I'd be fine if they went defense with every pick this year and maybe 1 OLineman for depth.

I give that a provisional "agree" for it's emphasis. If one considered Rodgers the starter at TE, I believe the entire starting offense is signed through 2016 or beyond.

With perhaps 9 or 10 picks (go Newhouse!) including 2 or 3 compensatories, I doubt we'll see 8 - 9 defensive players taken.

3 of the first 4, or 4 of the first 5, picks on defense? Sure.

On offense:

- An 8th. O-lineman would be in order as you say.

- McCarthy likes him some TEs. There's only 3 on the roster now, Quarless is in his contract year and Perillo is undistinguised. On the other side of the same coin, without Kuhn there's nobody on the roster who can block in short yardage sets. So an H-back who's mostly a blocker and can catch a little would be the minimum if Kuhn is not signed. The better option would be a pass catching developmental TE to compete with Perillo for the #3 spot along with a fullback if Kuhn is not resigned (though he should be).

- If Tolzien is supposed to be the #2, then a QB draftee would be in order.

Edit: Maybe we don't need a blocking TE or fullback if Raji is re-signed. For what he's done and been paid the last 4 years he should play both ways.

 

[RRyder]

So currently Detroit can salivate over wasting the 97th pick in 2016 for Suh. I think his pay is part of the formula. What else is included? If he breaks a nail in camp and sits out all season, will that lower their comp pick?

Im pretty sure its based off what kind of contract he received was alone so if he ends up on IR that wouldnt effect it but I could be wrong. The NFL hasnt released the exact formula for how they dispense comp picks so I could very easliy be mistaken.

But yeah Lions fans got the last pick of the 3rd round, or at best the 3rd to last pick of the 3rd round if other teams receive 3rd round comps, to look forward to for losing Suh

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So currently Detroit can salivate over wasting the 97th pick in 2016 for Suh. I think his pay is part of the formula. What else is included? If he breaks a nail in camp and sits out all season, will that lower their comp pick?

The NFL doesn't publish the formula for calculating compensatory picks but it seems the contract is the most important part in it. It's pretty safe to assume the Lions will receive the 97th pick in the 2016 draft for losing Suh.