Offseason Thread: Perry/Bennett/Kendricks

[bdpecore]

Like Dude,said injuries are part of the game and are going to inevitably happen.The point is the Packers need to be in a better position to handle those injuries.Most people who have been advocating for Ted to be more active in free agency aren't saying he should break the bank and build a team through free agency.I'm all for building through the draft,but you need free agency to add depth so that when you lose a guy or two your next man up is at least someone of quality,as opposed to having to rely on an undrafted scrub like Gunter in a championship game.That's what I am saying.

Yea t gets annoying when so many act like those who get frustrated by Ted are asking him to sign a bunch of guys to monster contracts in free agency.

Look at Belichick. He rarely signs super expensive free agents to monster multi-year deals. Instead he signs or trades for guys every year who contribute, without blowing up his cap.

Even when he signed Revis, it was only for one year, but he got it done. Got the Moss trade done. Traded for Welker. Signed Hogan. Has added a ton of guys over the years on the cheap who either were key contributors or just were needed depth.

Sure some moves didn't pan out, but he doesn't adhere to some rigid philosophy. Unlike so many in the NFL, Belichick trusts his ability to evaluate players and fit, then is willing to pull the trigger using every avenue possible to build good teams each year and not killing his future either.

Yeah the Patriots have injuries too,it's just not as glaring because their depth isn't a bunch of practice squad players.

One of the best examples of a GM who built the team's foundation through the draft but used free agency and smart trades to add quality and depth was none other than Ron Wolf in the 90's.

How many times in the 90's do you remember someone getting hurt and the next man up was at least someone of quality.Sure maybe the production at the position fell off a bit when a starter was out but it didn't fall completely off the map,because Ron Wolf didn't count on scrap heap level players for our depth.

I would like you to provide an example of a time the Pats or any team that has dealt with multiple injuries at one position and still made a deep playoff run. Teams do have to deal with multiple injuries on the same side of the ball but not to often does one team have injuries to their top three players at the same position and still compete.

[Profound23]

Another thing people don't seem to consider is the money saved by not resigning Hayward was probably used to sign Cook. So would've Hayward's presence been enough in Cook's absence to beat Atlanta or even Dallas for that matter since Cook's production and final catch was pivotal in winning the game?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Or it means we don't carry over part of that 9.4 million and we are now 20 mil over the cap instead of 27 mil.

It is possible he wanted to carry over extra money to extend Lacy but ultimately didn't make him man offer once he got hurt. I doubt he simply rolls over money for no apparent reason.

Anything is possible. It's also possible by retaining Hayward, Shields isn't relied on to do so much and never suffers another concussion....our secondary plays lights out...we win the Superbowl and everyone wants to either stay (Lang, Perry...etc) to win another or other players come in at a deep discount to win their first.

Also, your reasoning may show exactly why you don't keep rolling over money for player x and you just go for it now if possible.

I get it....you feel the need to defend Ted in every post and I have tried to meet you halfway, but you can't defend every move he has made or not made by rationalizing what ifs.

[chuckleslove]

Didn't Shields get a concussion on like the 5th play of the first game? I doubt Hayward being here stops that. Just bad times for him.

[bdpecore]

Or it means we don't carry over part of that 9.4 million and we are now 20 mil over the cap instead of 27 mil.

It is possible he wanted to carry over extra money to extend Lacy but ultimately didn't make him man offer once he got hurt. I doubt he simply rolls over money for no apparent reason.

Anything is possible. It's also possible by retaining Hayward, Shields isn't relied on to do so much and never suffers another concussion....our secondary plays lights out...we win the Superbowl and everyone wants to either stay (Lang, Perry...etc) to win another or other players come in at a deep discount to win their first.

Also, your reasoning may show exactly why you don't keep rolling over money for player x and you just go for it now if possible.

I get it....you feel the need to defend Ted in every post and I have tried to meet you halfway, but you can't defend every move he has made or not made by rationalizing what ifs.

I don't always defend Ted and do get frustrated when he doesn't do more but I also realize he is first and foremost running a successful business and when doing so you are not going to make everyone happy. Could he spend more money and get a better return on his investment? Sure. But he could also make enough minor mistakes which could have a much larger negative impact long term. It's easy to say he should have done this, or spent on so and so but there are so many behind the scene factors which we cannot and do not understand or see that I just prefer to trust his judgement and decision- making since he has a long standing proven track record of success in the league. I am always willing to meet people halfway when I have all the facts in front of me and can ultimately determine I was wrong. But in this situation we are both trying to argue "what ifs" which we cannot prove nor deny we're even possible. So let's just agree to disagree and hope Ted can get us back to a Super Bowl next season.

[Profound23]

Didn't Shields get a concussion on like the 5th play of the first game? I doubt Hayward being here stops that. Just bad times for him.

I doubt it too, my point is he is saying all this negative stuff that may have come from us retaining Hayward, but ignoring the potential positives that could have happened. My point was anything is possible.

[bdpecore]

Didn't Shields get a concussion on like the 5th play of the first game? I doubt Hayward being here stops that. Just bad times for him.

I doubt it too, my point is he is saying all this negative stuff that may have come from us retaining Hayward, but ignoring the potential positives that could have happened. My point was anything is possible.

No I wasn't saying Hayward wouldn't have had a positive impact on our defense. Just that it might very well have been somewhat offset by possibly not signing Cook instead. Hayward had a great season and would have been nice to have in hindsight. But again it's hindsight which is always 20/20. And you are right, anything is possible like losing your #1 corner for the entire season 5 plays into game one.

[Profound23]

So keeping Hayward is 20/20 hindsight I get it. We are using that and other past incident to show a pattern here. Almost everyone here commended him for Bennett and Kendrick but going into the off-season knew defense was the biggest issue. It's his job to fix it and while he still has time, the defense is worse off so far this off-season. So people are going to complain about it, let them, no need to try to rationalize every mistake Ted has made. Even you have to see this defense will need a miracle or two to step it up. The only defense could be he expects his offense to play at a ridiculous level.

[bdpecore]

So keeping Hayward is 20/20 hindsight I get it. We are using that and other past incident to show a pattern here. Almost everyone here commended him for Bennett and Kendrick but going into the off-season knew defense was the biggest issue. It's his job to fix it and while he still has time, the defense is worse off so far this off-season. So people are going to complain about it, let them, no need to try to rationalize every mistake Ted has made. Even you have to see this defense will need a miracle or two to step it up. The only defense could be he expects his offense to play at a ridiculous level.

I do agree currently the defense is looking worse than last season but we are only 9 days into free agency and still have time to make more moves and will be adding players via the draft. So instead of freaking out and having knee jerk reactions every time we sign or lose a player, I simply choose to wait to see the finished product before passing any final judgement on his offseason decisions.

Edit: I also don't think he has made any mistakes thus far to note. He didn't overpay Lang, Tretter or Hyde. He made a competitive offer to Lacy which he declined to go play for similar money on a team which features the running game. He resigned Perry but let Peppers leave. And he added two TEs while letting Cook walk. What am I missing?

[Profound23]

If Lynch goes to Oakland, AP and Charles will have to come at a deep discount. They would either have to sign with a bad team for the money, go to a team who already has a rb, or take very little to come to a team like GB or the Giants.

[wichmae]

I personally think Charles is done and AP wants too much coin. Like I said before I would rather have Jennings or Asiata.

[El Duderino]

I would like you to provide an example of a time the Pats or any team that has dealt with multiple injuries at one position and still made a deep playoff run. Teams do have to deal with multiple injuries on the same side of the ball but not to often does one team have injuries to their top three players at the same position and still compete.

If last season had been an outlier by the Packers having a very mediocre to bad defense, i'd gladly give Ted a mulligan.

That isn't the case though. The team hasn't had a top 10 defense since the Super Bowl season and during many of those years the defense was below average to bad.

I don't give a crap if Ted chooses to build almost entirely through the draft, uses free agency more, make trades or not, etc etc, just please do something to put more talented defenses on the field. I've flat out had it with defenses who can't get off the field and make plays when it's needed.

That feeling of dread where i have to imagine the defense getting a key stop, but knowing instead the odds are high that they'll get sliced right through. It's now the norm in Green Bay, not just some fluke occurrence last year.

Until Ted finally fixes the talent deficiencies on defense, everything will rely yet again on Rodgers and the guys on offense to bail out the defense and when they can't, the Packers lose. I'm tired of that needing to be the case.

Brady clearly is one of if not the best ever, but he hasn't had to go into most seasons with a defense as a ball and chain on his leg to try and still win titles with as Rodgers often has had to do. I will grant though that Aaron played terrible in that NFC Title game vs Seattle which allowed for that miserable ending to have a chance to happen.

[Rockmaninoff]

It felt like Rip and Monty were a good enough tandem by the end of the season. Just draft a running back for upside and depth.

[th87]

So keeping Hayward is 20/20 hindsight I get it. We are using that and other past incident to show a pattern here. Almost everyone here commended him for Bennett and Kendrick but going into the off-season knew defense was the biggest issue. It's his job to fix it and while he still has time, the defense is worse off so far this off-season. So people are going to complain about it, let them, no need to try to rationalize every mistake Ted has made. Even you have to see this defense will need a miracle or two to step it up. The only defense could be he expects his offense to play at a ridiculous level.

I do agree currently the defense is looking worse than last season but we are only 9 days into free agency and still have time to make more moves and will be adding players via the draft. So instead of freaking out and having knee jerk reactions every time we sign or lose a player, I simply choose to wait to see the finished product before passing any final judgement on his offseason decisions.

Edit: I also don't think he has made any mistakes thus far to note. He didn't overpay Lang, Tretter or Hyde. He made a competitive offer to Lacy which he declined to go play for similar money on a team which features the running game. He resigned Perry but let Peppers leave. And he added two TEs while letting Cook walk. What am I missing?

The problem is that the finished product has often had glaring holes that ultimately cost us in the end. This has been an ongoing phenomenon.

The TE situation was terrible in 2015, which caused the offense to totally stagnate and squander a 6-0 start. In 2013, we were reliant on MD Jennings/McMillian at safety, and were weak at OLB, which cost us against SF in the playoffs, and was a factor in us going 2-5-1 when Rodgers went down. In 2012, our weakness at OLB (relying on Walden) allowed Kaepernick to set a record that will never again be broken. In 2011, the defense gave up the most passing yards in NFL history, partly because there was no outside help considered after Collins got injured (and weakness opposite Matthews). Maybe if we do consider such, we don't give up a Hail Mary against the Giants, and the whole complexion of the game, and thus, the season changes.

Last year was just another example of a glaring hole killing us. It's not a good idea to go into the season starting a second year unproven player at CB. In the past, we'd always had two veterans, and the young guy was the third CB. Harris/Woodson/Williams. Williams got a few years to learn. Then it was Woodson/Williams/Shields, where Shields got a few years to learn. And so on.

And it was really only one injury that caused all this. Shields. And if Randall was so banged up that he couldn't even be effective, then he shouldn't have been out there. But since he was, the team had to have believed him to be at least somewhat healthy. Either way, it's evident that TT should've exercised more urgency in getting that weakness taken care of. There were street FAs available mid-season (e.g. Cromartie) who certainly could've been more effective than the nothing we got from our existing corners.

When we lost in 2012, I remember saying here that we'll have a similar outcome every year, because TT has proved himself unwilling to be flexible in his dogmatism, and so our weaknesses will do us in every time.

I wouldn't be upset if he retired. We talk about what a good drafter he is, but if you look at his impact picks after 2011: Perry (finally), Daniels, Hayward (who he didn't keep), maybe Lacy, Bakhtiari, HHCD, Adams, and Montgomery. Not bad. But when you compare it to Rodgers, Collins, Jennings, Raji, Matthews, Nelson, Lang, Sitton, Cobb, etc., the impact isn't even close. So I think he's been coasting a bit on reputation, and is buoyed by having the GOAT QB.

And how do we know they haven't been reaching out to free agents? Let's assume we are. If we're reaching out to everyone and can't get them to agree to our price despite giving them a unique opportunity to win a SB (only one other team can sell this) and to play with the GOAT, then we are terrible salespeople. And given that Ball is the best in the business in this regard, the only logical conclusion is that we are rarely serious suitors for FA services. Trevathan last year even said so explicitly.

[Dandridgefav]

Some vet FAs to consider

A team with Super Bowl aspirations needs to have a veteran reserve at a couple positions none more-so than at LT. A playoff team suddenly forced to start a developmental rookie or 2nd yr player at LT due to injury to the regular starter is most likely toast. Having a rookie who wasn’t talented enough to start at the beginning of the season is almost certainly still not talented enough to start at the end of the season and playoffs. This a spot where a formerly quality starter who is clearly winding down but has a year in the tank is major worthwhile investment. He won’t play on special teams much but consider it a specialized position.
King Dunlap
LT 31
Ryan Clady
LT 30

The Packs’ CB situation is dire. However it is highly unlikely both Roland and Rollins are busts. Both played OK rookie seasons? So what happened? Two problems – 1) Their #1 CB – Shields - who took the #1 receiver was lost; #2) The only experienced vet in the secondary was lost– also Shields. While FA will not solve #1 it can offer some help with #2. The Pack will almost certainly need to draft a rookie capable of staying with the #1 WR as Roland or Rollins are not up to it. BUT the #2 CB could be a vet or more likely Rolands who benefits from 1 or 2 vets to stabilize him.
Brandon Flowers
CB 31
Lardarius Webb
CB 31
Shareece Wright
CB 29
Patrick Robinson
CB 29
Tramon Williams
CB 34

Obviously we need pass rushers coming off the edge. In the 3-4 those are often OLBs as 3-4 DE’s that can rush the passer usually shift inside. But the Packers have embarrassing demonstrated, they have been un-able to stop the run and having one vet who may not be much of a pass rusher but can be counted on to seal his edge on short yardage 3rd downs is probably worth 1 of the 6 DL roster spots.
Jared Odrick
DE 29

Tyson Jackson
DE 30

Our OL now has a huge hole. It is highly unlikely the starter is now on he roster. IF TT drafts a G in the 2nd round he may get a starter. While TT has had great success in lower rounds – especially the 4th round – in drafting future starters all of them needed a couple years before they could be regular starters. And its also highly unlikely there is a vet FA left who will play at a high level but circumstances and the draft may make an average vet with experience less damaging than a green rookie drafted late. There might be a vet T that isn’t quick enough to handle outside rushers anymore that could possibly switch to G and cut it inside.
Brandon Fusco
G 28
Breno Giacomini
RT 31
Sebastian Vollmer
RT 32

[Profound23]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/18/slim-pickings-remain-in-free-agency/

[Frank Nova]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/18/slim-pickings-remain-in-free-agency/

Minter, Brown and/or Hankins would help the D tremendously. Not sure what the asking price is but I'm sure 2/15 type deal would entice 1 of them to come play for a ship and that still leaves us a little over 20m in cap space to sign all our rookies and roll over cap into the season for extensions and what not. I agree with the ppl that talk about "just because you have it to spend doesn't mean you should spend it" but upgrading a weak position with a small chunk of what you have to spend isn't exactly "blowing your load".

I saw that 12 wants to restructure his deal now, I'd say the guy is a super hero at this point. I mean the guy is the sole reason we're a relevant contending team. If you want the ball in his hands as much as possible, you need a D that can get the hell off the field on 3rd downs. Why that's such an implausible concept for the FO is turning into a joke. It's been the same old song and dance since 2011. 12 is arguably the best player in the league all year and our D let's us down at some point in year and usually in a playoff game we give up 35+pts and we're watching the rest of the playoffs/Super Bowl on a couch wondering why we didn't have enough to finish the job.

[jakecronus8]

Pretty sure Rodgers wants a raise

ETA: as he should

[Balls2TheWalls]

The thing I like about this free agency period is that Ted Thompson did not sign anyone that would affect his draft board unless it was going to take a position off of the board all together (like he did with Tight End). He did not want to clog up running back before the draft unless it was bringing his guy back. There is no reason to go out and get someone just in case a player like Dalvin Cook falls into our lap. I think signing an ILB or a rotational Defensive Lineman would be safe, but I think that we are likely to go CB in the first round, and signing a guy that is just going to be a sidegrade to the rookie while also costing much more would be a mistake. There will be guys that could help us after the draft is over.

[Profound23]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/18/slim-pickings-remain-in-free-agency/

Minter, Brown and/or Hankins would help the D tremendously. Not sure what the asking price is but I'm sure 2/15 type deal would entice 1 of them to come play for a ship and that still leaves us a little over 20m in cap space to sign all our rookies and roll over cap into the season for extensions and what not. I agree with the ppl that talk about "just because you have it to spend doesn't mean you should spend it" but upgrading a weak position with a small chunk of what you have to spend isn't exactly "blowing your load".

Those three and Revis are about all I would consider as upgrades at this point on defense.

[ReddRum]

http://www.5thtackle.com/legarrette-blount-set-to-sign-with-green-bay/


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums