ImageImage

Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks

Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25

Profound23
General Manager
Posts: 9,769
And1: 636
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
   

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1761 » by Profound23 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:40 am

bdpecore wrote:
Wisky4life wrote:It is almost like we let players go in free agency for free while the Pats trade the player on their final deal before the big payday. It's a gamble for both ways but is how the Pats are staying ahead of everyone else.

Yeah Ted values the comp picks and extra season of his players while Bill is willing to deal them early for picks or other players.


Bill's way allows him to sign free agents without losing the picks, Ted's way forces him to only sign free agents who were cut or lose the picks.

While that may seem insignificant, it could be the difference between making the conference title and winning the Superbowl.
I just wanted you to know that, if you can hear me, if it got into your brain somehow....that I spread my butt cheeks as Mike Honcho
Profound23
General Manager
Posts: 9,769
And1: 636
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
   

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1762 » by Profound23 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:13 pm

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/20/report-contract-parameters-mostly-in-place-for-saints-malcolm-butler/

Looks like Butler for pick #11 as long as they agree on a contract. Had the Saints just held out, they could have at the very least traded Cooks for Butler and kept their own pick....now they are trading at best an equal player but moving down the draft 21 picks.
I just wanted you to know that, if you can hear me, if it got into your brain somehow....that I spread my butt cheeks as Mike Honcho
User avatar
BucksPackers
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,586
And1: 270
Joined: Jun 23, 2016
   

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1763 » by BucksPackers » Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:17 pm

Profound23 wrote:http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/20/report-contract-parameters-mostly-in-place-for-saints-malcolm-butler/

Looks like Butler for pick #11 as long as they agree on a contract. Had the Saints just held out, they could have at the very least traded Cooks for Butler and kept their own pick....now they are trading at best an equal player but moving down the draft 21 picks.



Wow the Saints are idiots.
User avatar
M-C-G
RealGM
Posts: 11,787
And1: 3,336
Joined: Jan 13, 2013
     

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1764 » by M-C-G » Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:50 pm

Profound23 wrote:
M-C-G wrote:Cool twenty pages of how Ted isn't Bellicheck. Got it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Way to summarize and ignore the details, you tend to do that a lot and get irritated about intelligent conversation. If you don't like it, there is an ignore button or you can continue your 3rd grade sarcasm.


Sorry dude, not as much intelligent conversations as you may think. Now go sit on an egg. 3rd grade sarcasm out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Marc Lasry wrote:There's nothing worse than being mediocre, in business and in sports.


Marc Lasry wrote:By giving them a winning culture. I believe winning trumps all, and if not, we don't want that player
User avatar
BucksPackers
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,586
And1: 270
Joined: Jun 23, 2016
   

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1765 » by BucksPackers » Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:22 pm

M-C-G wrote:
Profound23 wrote:
M-C-G wrote:Cool twenty pages of how Ted isn't Bellicheck. Got it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Way to summarize and ignore the details, you tend to do that a lot and get irritated about intelligent conversation. If you don't like it, there is an ignore button or you can continue your 3rd grade sarcasm.


Sorry dude, not as much intelligent conversations as you may think. Now go sit on an egg. 3rd grade sarcasm out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



The last 20 pages have been all opinions and for someone to call it intelligent conversations is hilarious. Unless you are talking to TT yourself everything on this forum is an opinion. MC is correct to say that the last 20 pages were all crap. I've been waiting for someone to bring up some rumors or something. I have to filter through all of these lounge chair GM's we have in here lol.
User avatar
Kerb Hohl
RealGM
Posts: 23,259
And1: 742
Joined: Jun 17, 2005
Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1766 » by Kerb Hohl » Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:37 pm

One thing I will say if this trade is true: The Saints are the opposite end of fan complaints about TT.

There are many ways that I think can be argued to do it "better" than the Packers when you have a championship window including Seattle, New England, and maybe Denver's smaller window...the Saints did the opposite of what the Packers did and are the example of how being aggressive can go really bad. Brees is not Rodgers, but they've wasted the back end of his career and they're in a way worse position than the Packers.
User avatar
BucksPackers
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,586
And1: 270
Joined: Jun 23, 2016
   

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1767 » by BucksPackers » Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:52 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:One thing I will say if this trade is true: The Saints are the opposite end of fan complaints about TT.

There are many ways that I think can be argued to do it "better" than the Packers when you have a championship window including Seattle, New England, and maybe Denver's smaller window...the Saints did the opposite of what the Packers did and are the example of how being aggressive can go really bad. Brees is not Rodgers, but they've wasted the back end of his career and they're in a way worse position than the Packers.



The Packers are not making any wrong moves. The packers just are not making enough moves, which some think is the wrong way to approach this situation we are in. The Packers have the shot every season to potentially win a super bowl and that is all that you can ask for as a fan. We are not going to be able to get every stud player because sadly people do not want to live in Green Bay. The only guys we are getting in Free Agency are the vets that want to win a ring like Woodson, Peppers and others like that. The young free agents are taking the money or going to dallas, atlanta, New england, Pitt who have the same amount of chance as the packers do to win a super bowl.
Outlander
Sophomore
Posts: 207
And1: 33
Joined: Feb 14, 2014

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1768 » by Outlander » Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:00 pm

BucksPackers wrote:
M-C-G wrote:
Profound23 wrote:

Way to summarize and ignore the details, you tend to do that a lot and get irritated about intelligent conversation. If you don't like it, there is an ignore button or you can continue your 3rd grade sarcasm.


Sorry dude, not as much intelligent conversations as you may think. Now go sit on an egg. 3rd grade sarcasm out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



The last 20 pages have been all opinions and for someone to call it intelligent conversations is hilarious. Unless you are talking to TT yourself everything on this forum is an opinion. MC is correct to say that the last 20 pages were all crap. I've been waiting for someone to bring up some rumors or something. I have to filter through all of these lounge chair GM's we have in here lol.

Meh, there is never going to be anything of substance unless the Packers actually do something. Nobody knew anything about the tight ends they brought in until after it happened. Pretty much all rumors regarding the Packers are crap and far from intelligent.
User avatar
BucksPackers
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,586
And1: 270
Joined: Jun 23, 2016
   

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1769 » by BucksPackers » Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:02 pm

Outlander wrote:
BucksPackers wrote:
M-C-G wrote:
Sorry dude, not as much intelligent conversations as you may think. Now go sit on an egg. 3rd grade sarcasm out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



The last 20 pages have been all opinions and for someone to call it intelligent conversations is hilarious. Unless you are talking to TT yourself everything on this forum is an opinion. MC is correct to say that the last 20 pages were all crap. I've been waiting for someone to bring up some rumors or something. I have to filter through all of these lounge chair GM's we have in here lol.

Meh, there is never going to be anything of substance unless the Packers actually do something. Nobody knew anything about the tight ends they brought in until after it happened. Pretty much all rumors regarding the Packers are crap and far from intelligent.



True they keep all that a secret.
User avatar
ak7
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,205
And1: 1,160
Joined: Jun 04, 2012
     

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1770 » by ak7 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:24 pm

BucksPackers wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:One thing I will say if this trade is true: The Saints are the opposite end of fan complaints about TT.

There are many ways that I think can be argued to do it "better" than the Packers when you have a championship window including Seattle, New England, and maybe Denver's smaller window...the Saints did the opposite of what the Packers did and are the example of how being aggressive can go really bad. Brees is not Rodgers, but they've wasted the back end of his career and they're in a way worse position than the Packers.



The Packers are not making any wrong moves. The packers just are not making enough moves, which some think is the wrong way to approach this situation we are in. The Packers have the shot every season to potentially win a super bowl and that is all that you can ask for as a fan. We are not going to be able to get every stud player because sadly people do not want to live in Green Bay. The only guys we are getting in Free Agency are the vets that want to win a ring like Woodson, Peppers and others like that. The young free agents are taking the money or going to dallas, atlanta, New england, Pitt who have the same amount of chance as the packers do to win a super bowl.


Coincidentally, you're being a "lounge chair GM" by assuming we only lose out on FA's because of the location.
ROballer wrote:I will **** all over this league


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Lakers board AWARD Winning Dynasty League
User avatar
BucksPackers
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,586
And1: 270
Joined: Jun 23, 2016
   

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1771 » by BucksPackers » Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:33 pm

ak7 wrote:
BucksPackers wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:One thing I will say if this trade is true: The Saints are the opposite end of fan complaints about TT.

There are many ways that I think can be argued to do it "better" than the Packers when you have a championship window including Seattle, New England, and maybe Denver's smaller window...the Saints did the opposite of what the Packers did and are the example of how being aggressive can go really bad. Brees is not Rodgers, but they've wasted the back end of his career and they're in a way worse position than the Packers.



The Packers are not making any wrong moves. The packers just are not making enough moves, which some think is the wrong way to approach this situation we are in. The Packers have the shot every season to potentially win a super bowl and that is all that you can ask for as a fan. We are not going to be able to get every stud player because sadly people do not want to live in Green Bay. The only guys we are getting in Free Agency are the vets that want to win a ring like Woodson, Peppers and others like that. The young free agents are taking the money or going to dallas, atlanta, New england, Pitt who have the same amount of chance as the packers do to win a super bowl.


Coincidentally, you're being a "lounge chair GM" by assuming we only lose out on FA's because of the location.



I was not referring to my statements to be "intelligent conversation" lol. I understand that the comment I made was an opinion as well. Either I am right that people just don't want to live in Green Bay or I am wrong and TT just doesn't want to make our team better. I guess we will never find out.
RRyder823
Veteran
Posts: 2,844
And1: 768
Joined: May 06, 2014
   

Re: RE: Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1772 » by RRyder823 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 6:48 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:One thing I will say if this trade is true: The Saints are the opposite end of fan complaints about TT.

There are many ways that I think can be argued to do it "better" than the Packers when you have a championship window including Seattle, New England, and maybe Denver's smaller window...the Saints did the opposite of what the Packers did and are the example of how being aggressive can go really bad. Brees is not Rodgers, but they've wasted the back end of his career and they're in a way worse position than the Packers.


I'm sorry but the Saints are a case study for what the team would look like if the majority of fans had their way.

Case in point it all started going down hill for them the moment they signed Byrd to that huge deal. Deal mind you that most of the fans in question were pissed that TT DIDN'T offer because our Saftey situation was in even worse shape then CB is now. And now we have people that have gotten worked up because we didn't throw Gilmore or Bouye huge money and even people that think trading a 1st for Trumaine Johnson is a good idea.

That just kick started the Saints going all in with bad contracts and short sighted moves before they had to, because much like the arguments that you'll hear from the "TT needs to be more aggressive" crowd, they felt "well we can't just waist prime years of our HoF QB.

Alot of the bad deals the Saints have taken part in over the last few years were done with the same mentality that many Packers fans are advocating for.





Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app
User avatar
paulpressey25
Senior Mod - Bucks
Senior Mod - Bucks
Posts: 49,613
And1: 6,727
Joined: Oct 27, 2002
     

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1773 » by paulpressey25 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 7:38 pm

Two observations on TT.

1. We seemed to have gotten rid of the Belichick goalpost. A number of folks are saying Belichick is a once in a lifetime genius and you can't hold the Packers or TT to that standard. I'm mixed emotions on that take.

2. The depth and quality of impact players on this team seems to me much lighter as the years go by that John Schneider, John Dorsey and Reggie McKenzie have been gone. Add in the fact that TT inherited bookend Pro Bowl tackles in Tauscher and Clifton who helped the team a ton up through the 2010 SuperBowl. Just not feeling like TT is a great GM. Good GM clearly. Great? The picture gets more fuzzy by the year.
In depth discussions here - shorter stuff on Twitter

https://twitter.com/paulpressey25
jlyons043
Ballboy
Posts: 42
And1: 9
Joined: Jul 28, 2013

Re: RE: Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1774 » by jlyons043 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 8:28 pm

RRyder823 wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:One thing I will say if this trade is true: The Saints are the opposite end of fan complaints about TT.

There are many ways that I think can be argued to do it "better" than the Packers when you have a championship window including Seattle, New England, and maybe Denver's smaller window...the Saints did the opposite of what the Packers did and are the example of how being aggressive can go really bad. Brees is not Rodgers, but they've wasted the back end of his career and they're in a way worse position than the Packers.


I'm sorry but the Saints are a case study for what the team would look like if the majority of fans had their way.

Case in point it all started going down hill for them the moment they signed Byrd to that huge deal. Deal mind you that most of the fans in question were pissed that TT DIDN'T offer because our Saftey situation was in even worse shape then CB is now. And now we have people that have gotten worked up because we didn't throw Gilmore or Bouye huge money and even people that think trading a 1st for Trumaine Johnson is a good idea.

That just kick started the Saints going all in with bad contracts and short sighted moves before they had to, because much like the arguments that you'll hear from the "TT needs to be more aggressive" crowd, they felt "well we can't just waist prime years of our HoF QB.

Alot of the bad deals the Saints have taken part in over the last few years were done with the same mentality that many Packers fans are advocating for.





Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app


It's these type of posts that make me laugh.
User avatar
BucksPackers
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,586
And1: 270
Joined: Jun 23, 2016
   

Re: RE: Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1775 » by BucksPackers » Mon Mar 20, 2017 8:33 pm

jlyons043 wrote:
RRyder823 wrote:
Kerb Hohl wrote:One thing I will say if this trade is true: The Saints are the opposite end of fan complaints about TT.

There are many ways that I think can be argued to do it "better" than the Packers when you have a championship window including Seattle, New England, and maybe Denver's smaller window...the Saints did the opposite of what the Packers did and are the example of how being aggressive can go really bad. Brees is not Rodgers, but they've wasted the back end of his career and they're in a way worse position than the Packers.


I'm sorry but the Saints are a case study for what the team would look like if the majority of fans had their way.

Case in point it all started going down hill for them the moment they signed Byrd to that huge deal. Deal mind you that most of the fans in question were pissed that TT DIDN'T offer because our Saftey situation was in even worse shape then CB is now. And now we have people that have gotten worked up because we didn't throw Gilmore or Bouye huge money and even people that think trading a 1st for Trumaine Johnson is a good idea.

That just kick started the Saints going all in with bad contracts and short sighted moves before they had to, because much like the arguments that you'll hear from the "TT needs to be more aggressive" crowd, they felt "well we can't just waist prime years of our HoF QB.

Alot of the bad deals the Saints have taken part in over the last few years were done with the same mentality that many Packers fans are advocating for.





Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app


It's these type of posts that make me laugh.



Why is it funny?
jlyons043
Ballboy
Posts: 42
And1: 9
Joined: Jul 28, 2013

Re: RE: Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1776 » by jlyons043 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:04 pm

BucksPackers wrote:
jlyons043 wrote:
RRyder823 wrote:
I'm sorry but the Saints are a case study for what the team would look like if the majority of fans had their way.

Case in point it all started going down hill for them the moment they signed Byrd to that huge deal. Deal mind you that most of the fans in question were pissed that TT DIDN'T offer because our Saftey situation was in even worse shape then CB is now. And now we have people that have gotten worked up because we didn't throw Gilmore or Bouye huge money and even people that think trading a 1st for Trumaine Johnson is a good idea.

That just kick started the Saints going all in with bad contracts and short sighted moves before they had to, because much like the arguments that you'll hear from the "TT needs to be more aggressive" crowd, they felt "well we can't just waist prime years of our HoF QB.

Alot of the bad deals the Saints have taken part in over the last few years were done with the same mentality that many Packers fans are advocating for.





Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app


It's these type of posts that make me laugh.



Why is it funny?


Claiming that we'd turn into the Saints if we became 'more aggressive' in FA is just a tad ridiculous. Somebody better call BB and tell him all those FA signings & trades are going to destroy his team :lol:
RRyder823
Veteran
Posts: 2,844
And1: 768
Joined: May 06, 2014
   

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1777 » by RRyder823 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:17 pm

jlyons043 wrote:
BucksPackers wrote:
jlyons043 wrote:
It's these type of posts that make me laugh.



Why is it funny?


Claiming that we'd turn into the Saints if we became 'more aggressive' in FA is just a tad ridiculous. Somebody better call BB and tell him all those FA signings & trades are going to destroy his team :lol:

Well first and foremost you should remember that teams that get overly involved in FA tend to end up much closer to the current Saints rather then the Patriots. (Once again though gotta love the Patriots/BB goal posts)

It becomes ridiculous to suggest that we'd end up closer to the latter when the same types of moves that resulted in the Saints situation were advocated for by Packers fans.

Also while everyone is going gonzo over the Pats offseason it should be remembered that they're bringing in a ton of moving parts and quite honestly, if they do end up trading Butler, may actually not be as good as they were last year despite all those moves of Gronks back doesn't hold up. Gilmore for Butler would be a wash at best (if not a slight downgrade), Cook adds speed for them but that offense lives off their TEs and I'm not sure people realize how big Bennett was for them last year without Gronk. All that's before worrying about potential chemistry issues.

That's not me saying their offseason shouldn't be perceived as good or even great. Just that not everything turns out the way you expect simply by being more aggressive but also that just cause there's an exception to the rule doesn't mean the rule doesn't exist in the first place

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app
User avatar
El Duderino
RealGM
Posts: 19,315
And1: 905
Joined: May 30, 2005
Location: Working on pad level

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1778 » by El Duderino » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:25 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:One thing I will say if this trade is true: The Saints are the opposite end of fan complaints about TT.

There are many ways that I think can be argued to do it "better" than the Packers when you have a championship window including Seattle, New England, and maybe Denver's smaller window...the Saints did the opposite of what the Packers did and are the example of how being aggressive can go really bad. Brees is not Rodgers, but they've wasted the back end of his career and they're in a way worse position than the Packers.


No question that things can be worse. For all of Ted's faults at building defenses, the Saints have been worse between who they've drafted and signed in free agency.

Ted has in the past done a better job on that side of the ball, but for whatever reason the last 5-6 years he's just failed to draft better when it comes to defensive players and mixed in with his aversion to trust his ability to use free agency/trades, more often than not the defense has been a ball and chain around Rodgers ankles.

It's simply hard to win titles with a below average defense, even with having a special quarterback. That will usually prevent having a good enough record for a first round bye and thus needing to win three playoff games just to reach a Super Bowl. Granted, the Packers did it in 2010 and others have also, but it's a tougher road to navigate. Gotta be able to have a defense who can get stops when needed in playoff games. That hasn't been the case for to long.
User avatar
weezybaby856
Veteran
Posts: 2,919
And1: 366
Joined: Jul 04, 2008
Location: Jabari Island
       

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1779 » by weezybaby856 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:47 pm

Who is this Josh Hill and why are we interested in a 27/28yr old CB with 1 year of NFL experience that isn't even in the league anymore? Do I have that right?
Jabari for President
Profound23
General Manager
Posts: 9,769
And1: 636
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
   

Re: Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks 

Post#1780 » by Profound23 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:01 am

RRyder823 wrote:
jlyons043 wrote:
BucksPackers wrote:

Why is it funny?


Claiming that we'd turn into the Saints if we became 'more aggressive' in FA is just a tad ridiculous. Somebody better call BB and tell him all those FA signings & trades are going to destroy his team :lol:

Well first and foremost you should remember that teams that get overly involved in FA tend to end up much closer to the current Saints rather then the Patriots. (Once again though gotta love the Patriots/BB goal posts)

It becomes ridiculous to suggest that we'd end up closer to the latter when the same types of moves that resulted in the Saints situation were advocated for by Packers fans.

Also while everyone is going gonzo over the Pats offseason it should be remembered that they're bringing in a ton of moving parts and quite honestly, if they do end up trading Butler, may actually not be as good as they were last year despite all those moves of Gronks back doesn't hold up. Gilmore for Butler would be a wash at best (if not a slight downgrade), Cook adds speed for them but that offense lives off their TEs and I'm not sure people realize how big Bennett was for them last year without Gronk. All that's before worrying about potential chemistry issues.

That's not me saying their offseason shouldn't be perceived as good or even great. Just that not everything turns out the way you expect simply by being more aggressive but also that just cause there's an exception to the rule doesn't mean the rule doesn't exist in the first place

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app


I agree with everything except for Butler and Gilmore being a wash. They are a wash if Gilmore is getting 15 mil and Butler is playing on a rookie salary, but not if the salaries are as close as they will be once this deal is complete.

I have said all along though the one thing that might mess up the Pats is way too many moves in one season. Although that is what most said 10 years ago and they went undefeated and were an incredible catch away from winning it all. If anyone can pull this off, it's those cheating chowder heads.

Also agree that most want us to make crazy moves. That isn't usually what I am asking for. Every year I find one or two midrange players who are available at a deep discount and want Ted to acquire them. If not them, someone TO FIX THIS DEFENSE. He did an incredible job bringing in not one, but two tight ends that will have the offense playing very well and I appreciate that. I don't need him to be as good as Belichick and I definitely don't want him doing what the Saints are doing as they literally are chasing their tails.

weezybaby856 wrote:Who is this Josh Hill and why are we interested in a 27/28yr old CB with 1 year of NFL experience that isn't even in the league anymore? Do I have that right?


Out of the league for three years, undersized, and EXTREMELY slow. I think he ran a 4.7 during the combine. Maybe Ted has him confused with the tight end who signed with the Bears and thought he was bringing in another tight end.

I don't care about the signing, it's probably at the league minimum if we even sign him at all. At this point though I would rather bring Tramon Williams back who is just as slow in this point of his career but has better instincts.
I just wanted you to know that, if you can hear me, if it got into your brain somehow....that I spread my butt cheeks as Mike Honcho

Return to Green Bay Packers