Pack to Franchise Pickett?

[PkrsBcksGphsMqt]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/10137/report-packers-will-franchise-pickett

Initially, I didn’t believe that any NFC North player merited a franchise or transition tag. But if Green Bay franchises defensive tackle Ryan Pickett, as the NFL Network’s Jason La Canfora reports, then I wonder if it could be the first of a two-step move.

Two years ago, the Packers used their franchise tag on defensive tackle Corey Williams, retaining his rights as the free agent market began. Ultimately, they traded Williams to Cleveland for a second-round draft pick.

As of Monday, the Packers and Pickett weren’t close to a long-term contract agreement. You wonder if the Packers intend to commit a significant amount of money to Pickett, who turns 31 in October, when 2009 first-round draft choice B.J. Raji essentially plays the same position in the 3-4 scheme. I suppose either player could move to defensive end, but tackle is the ideal spot for both players.

The franchise number for defensive tackles is $7.003 million. I don’t have any inside knowledge on this issue, but it makes some sense if the Packers use the tag as a tool to get a return on Pickett’s eventual departure. The deadline for applying franchise and transition tags is Thursday. As always, stay tuned.

Forgot the "?" in the title, sorry.

[ReasonablySober]

Pickett was the far better nose in 2009. I'd prefer to keep him there and Raji at end.

[LarryHarris]

I'd hate to see them move Pickett now. The year after we moved Williams, it was pretty obvious that we could have used him. I'd assume the same thing would happen with Ryan.

[MickeyDavis]

The Packers and the agent of unrestricted free agent nose tackle Ryan Pickett have been talking about a new contract this week, but with no deal yet there is a report that the club will put the franchise tag on him.

Jason LaCanfora of the NFL Network reported that the Packers plan to franchise Pickett if a deal isn't reached before Thursday, the final day NFL teams can put tags on players.

A source familiar with the situation could not say for certain the Packers were going to move in that direction, but thought it was a possibility. It's questionable whether the Packers will be willing to offer Pickett the $7.003 million it takes to put a franchise tag on him given he made just $2.975 million last year.

But Pickett was a key part of the team's No. 1-ranked run defense, and with end Johnny Jolly's status up in the air because of felony criminal charges against him, they may need 2009 first-round pick B.J. Raji to play end.

Several teams have already showed how they value big men by putting franchise tags on them. New England will put the franchise tag on nose tackle Vince Wilfolk and San Francisco did the same on Aubrayo Franklin.

If the Packers put the franchise tag on Pickett, another team would have to give them two first-round draft picks in exchange for signing him. The Packers would have the right to match the offer before taking the two picks.

The Packers could also put the transition tag on him. That would cost them $6.353 million on a one-year deal. Under transition rules, the Packers would not receive any compensation for Pickett, but they would have the right to match.

For an extra $650,000, they probably would be willing to put the franchise tag on him. The threat of the tag could get Pickett and his representative to think harder about accepting a long-term deal before the start of free agency. With the franchise/transition tag, Pickett gets nothing upfront and starts drawing his paycheck when the regular season starts.

Teams like the Packers, Patriots and 49ers may feel that putting the tag on heavy players like Pickett, Wilfolk and Franklin would give them more motivation to stay in shape because they would again be playing for a contract next season. Teams are less and less interested in giving up big signing bonuses to players whose weight issues might lessen their availability.

Pickett is really the only player the Packers would consider for the franchise or transition tags they have. Safety Nick Collins is not because his $3 million salary in 2009 guarantees he'll make more than the highest qualifying offer the team can make to a restricted free agent.

Collins is guaranteed 110% of his $3 million base salary, which comes out to $3.3 million. The right of first refusal plus first- and third-round draft pick compensation comes with a tender of $3.268 million. So if the Packers make the $3.3 million offer, teams would have to give up a first and a third for Collins. That would be ample protection.

[ReasonablySober]

Big guys like Pickett tend to hold a good amount of value late into their 30s. I'd have no problem giving him a long term deal. Try and work something out. If nothing comes of it then tag him and be done with it. The only way I'd move him is for a high second rounder or better.

[Balls2TheWalls]

The guy has been a load for us. No reason to let him go. If he stays healthy, he is as good as any D-tackle in the league at holding the line.

[eagle13]

I almost posted my hope earlier this week that Pickett would be tagged if they do not reach a deal. Tag may even be better than multi-year contract.

Probably won't happen but I’d transition tag Clifton. Just to be safe. Its only one year and that's all Chad has left anyway. The big $ is in this uncapped year.

With uncapped year we get 2 transition tags. Doubt it happens, but I’d consider using the other on Kampman. Just to be safe. We need pass rush and he can deliver. Gives us another year to evaluate before making a contract offer next year.

I also keep Harris on board even as the nickel or S if he’s not a starting caliber CB anymore - unless he shows he’s washed up.

We are legitimate SB contender and by keeping our own vets and adding another draft we are stronger than if we let vets getaway.

We don’t really need to sign many outside FAs, if any. We need to sign ours.

The only vets I let go for sure are Montgomery, Bush, Thompson, Barbre, and probably College, David Lee, Popp, Green & Wynn. I’d first try to trade College for a 6th.

[Balls2TheWalls]

I'm not buying that Kampman is a good fit. He had a lot of tackles, but he is a huge liability in coverage, and a lot of teams were finding ways to get him in coverage. He also was not getting to the QB. He definitely isn't going to be worth the kind of money he is going to want. The only reason you put any sort of tag on him is to force someone to trade with you to get him.

[eagle13]

I'm not buying that Kampman is a good fit. He had a lot of tackles, but he is a huge liability in coverage, and a lot of teams were finding ways to get him in coverage. He also was not getting to the QB. He definitely isn't going to be worth the kind of money he is going to want. The only reason you put any sort of tag on him is to force someone to trade with you to get him.

He was 2nd in QB hits even with missing 6-7 games.

He was solid against run.

I hear you about coverage tho but he seemed to be developing. Capers just has to scheme a little better for that. I'd rush him more. Realize surprise element. But Kamp got sacks as DE even when they knew he was coming. Pressure is pressure.

IF we can get another Clay - OK. But until then...

Plus I don't want Bears or Vikes to sign him.

Lastly if he's heallthy we can still trade him.

[MickeyDavis]

I'd like to know how Kampmann's rehab is going. Haven't heard anything about it.

[Wiscfan92]

Are they going to keep Kampan, because I've seen on this thread that they might be interested in dumping him?

[MickeyDavis]

There has been no decision on Kampmann. I'm sure they'd love to have him back. It's the price they'd have to pay that makes it interesting. And his injury adds to the uncertainness.

[Captain Erv]

I heard a guy on the radio late last week from Pro Football Weekly and he said Kampmann was ahead of schedule on his rehab, but didn't go into any real specifics.

[Balls2TheWalls]

The quarterback hits stat has more to do with how sad our pass rush is without Clay Matthews than with him having a good season or being a good fit.

[RiotPunch]

Disappointed to hear this just because it sort of foreshadows dealing him. Would have rather signed him to a longterm deal and tagged Kamp.

If we trade him for a 2nd rounder, we will have to take a defensive lineman anyway. Pickett was dominant last year and showed no signs of slowing down. I don't know... if we want to remain a good defense, letting Pick go is a big step backwards.

[MikeIsGood]

I guess I'll mention this here vs. starting a new thread since there's some discussion on him going on....

Bears are interested in Kampman. Also interested in Peppers, but he might be too expensive for them.

[ReasonablySober]

Pickett officially gets the tag.

That's fine.

[chuckleslove]

Pickett officially gets the tag.

That's fine.

Damn you are too quick for me

[Newz]

You guys think this means we will be trading him?

[ReasonablySober]

Unless he says he doesn't want to be here anymore, I doubt it. He's too valuable to the Packer defense.