Saints Watch- Additional First Round Pick (0-1)

[pacman5252]

26 minutes ago, Beast said:

 

The Packers biggest coming needs are DL, Edge rusher, FS seeing at Wilkerson, Daniels, Lowry, Matthews, Fackrell and Clinton-Dix are all FAs in the next two years.

And the 2019 draft is said to be packed with DL and edge rushers... so it might be a perfect time to draft some new blood at the positions.

 

QB, OT and ILB are also needed, but the Packers are probably going to resign Rodgers... they have lots of OTs options to decided to resign and ILB isn't as much of an important position in the 3-4 as it is in the 4-3, and they just drafted an ILB in the 3rd round.

In the modern NFL position groups usually have some turnover every two years (outside QB where there is one and he can play 15 years).

I don't think the DL is that pressing of a need going forward. Clark/Adams have potential. We'll probably extend 1-2 of Wilk, Daniels, Lowry. 

OLB still is a big deal. Matthews is a replacement level player at this point. I don't know why you'd even talk about Fackrell as a loss.

Dix might be Eric Reid/middle tier S with an old school skill set that can't find a job. Many teams are now just moving corners there.

Anyway though, the only player on this list that was a real plus player last year was Daniels. If the rest of the list was out the door, good riddance.

 

 

 

 

[Beast]

2 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

Anyway though, the only player on this list that was a real plus player last year was Daniels. If the rest of the list was out the door, good riddance.

Yeah good riddance to any sort of team depth, we wouldn't want to be a good team and have a team with depth to help handle injuries... that would be silly and pointless... (sarcasm)

 

Teams need more than just their state players... even when healthy, DL and OLBers need to rotate to keep each other fresh though out a game.

[pacman5252]

11 minutes ago, Beast said:

Yeah good riddance to any sort of team depth, we wouldn't want to be a good team and have a team with depth to help handle injuries... that would be silly and pointless... (sarcasm)

 

Teams need more than just their state players... even when healthy, DL and OLBers need to rotate to keep each other fresh though out a game.

Depth is important, but I was more getting at you don't need to spend plus picks on depth (especially at DL/ILB, traditionally non plus positions for this D).

[pacman5252]

I will say though, we do need edge players

[Beast]

1 hour ago, pacman5252 said:

Depth is important, but I was more getting at you don't need to spend plus picks on depth (especially at DL/ILB, traditionally non plus positions for this D).

I completely disagree about the DL not needing depth... and think the Packers poor DL depth has cost them over the years. I remember one year with Favre as starter, the defense was doing very well, until a DT got IRed for the year and Corey Williams (the Packers great 3rd down specialist), had to actually play the first two downs then and he struggled and they lost their 3rd down pass rush and couldn't get off the field.

1 hour ago, pacman5252 said:

I will say though, we do need edge players

I'm waiting to see Pettine's system, but I know some people have talked about the Packers running 3-3 which I think Wilkerson was being used as an Edge player as least at times. I think that will take some of the pressure off the edge players, and put more on the DL.

[CWood21]

4 hours ago, pacman5252 said:

Few things;
A few things would have to happen for this,  but it is very possible. AR is going to be 35, coming off an injury, and wants 30M a year. If he got hurt again (like a 15% chance). I'd say it is more like 20% chance we drafted a QB than 1

Even then, there's a significantly higher chance that we let Aaron Rodgers play out his contract and then have the franchise tag available.  So we're talking about an injury-riddled season in 2018 and he still has an additional year of control plus any we create with the franchise tag.  The Packers aren't committing big money to Rodgers, and protecting themselves in case he gets hurt.

4 hours ago, pacman5252 said:

Kizer sucked in Cleveland and we traded a player with one year on his deal for him. We don't have anything invested in him. If he sucks, and we were in the situation where we could draft a college QB high, we would. I think he'll make the team, but if he bombed in camp, it wouldn't shock me if he was cut this year.

Also, draft guros always say next year's class sucks, then 2-3 QB do great in college and then all of a sudden there is 1985 propaganda spit out. Mayfield was projected as like a mid rounder and went one. Trubisky went one coming out of nowhere. Pat Mahommes came out of nowhere to go top 10ish. It happens

We're not taking a QB high in the draft in the next 2-3 years, you can take that to the bank.  I don't know why anyone thinks they would otherwise.  Short of Rodgers' arm falling off, Rodgers is our starting QB for the next 4 years minimum.  Beyond that, who knows.  You talk about the next year's QB draft class being worse is the concept, but it's normally the other way around.  Most of the time we hear about how next year's QB class is going be better than this years.

[MacReady]

How many years before Favre retired did we draft Rodgers?

[squire12]

12 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

How many years before Favre retired did we draft Rodgers?

Rodgers drafted in 2005.  Farve traded after the 2007 season.  Rodgers sat for the 2005, 2006 and 2007 seasons.

[MacReady]

9 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Rodgers drafted in 2005.  Farve traded after the 2007 season.  Rodgers sat for the 2005, 2006 and 2007 seasons.

Let's do it again.  Trade Rodgers's before we get nothing for him.  

[squire12]

4 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Let's do it again.  Trade Rodgers's before we get nothing for him.  

Are you turning into Reggie McKenzie now?  

Dealing away top tier players

[Norm]

Anyone see that Kamara interview article lol

My new favorite player. Bye, I'm not a Saints fan. Have fun not trading for Mack.

[spilltray]

Don't get overly paranoid about contracts being up. Haha isn't leaving,and Wilkerson is on a cheap one year deal so that's completely up in the air if he's even an asset. Lowry is ok, but Fackerell so far has just been a body anyway. Matthews is the only concerning name.

 

Pass rush, WR are the two current depth questions.

[pacman5252]

17 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Even then, there's a significantly higher chance that we let Aaron Rodgers play out his contract and then have the franchise tag available.  So we're talking about an injury-riddled season in 2018 and he still has an additional year of control plus any we create with the franchise tag.  The Packers aren't committing big money to Rodgers, and protecting themselves in case he gets hurt.

We're not taking a QB high in the draft in the next 2-3 years, you can take that to the bank.  I don't know why anyone thinks they would otherwise.  Short of Rodgers' arm falling off, Rodgers is our starting QB for the next 4 years minimum.  Beyond that, who knows.  You talk about the next year's QB draft class being worse is the concept, but it's normally the other way around.  Most of the time we hear about how next year's QB class is going be better than this years.

Take a step back and look at the scenario (which probably has a 10-20% chance of happening)

-If AR doesn't sign a deal this season, misses 10 games and GB goes 5-11

All of a sudden the narrative is we have a 35 year old QB that has been injured 2 years in a row (missed 3 seasons total), with one year on his deal. We also would have 2 first round picks (with typically 2 QBs who pop and go top 10)...

1. This is not unrealistic. AR will be 35, has missed 2 seasons, and takes more shots than most of the QBs that have played into their late 30s/early 40s. I'd compare him more to Romo from a play style who lasted to 36 than Brady/Brees

2. I think you would change your mind on the "won't draft a QB" stance, to thinking "well its possible". Fans would be screaming for it, especially when one or 2 QBs pop into the top 5 discussion like they do most years.

 

PS, I hope AR stays healthy all year, we load up our D and OL the next 2 years, we franchise AR in 2020 and delay our succession plan, but I wouldn't be surprised if it came sooner.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MacReady]

8 hours ago, spilltray said:

but Fackerell so far has just been a body anyway. Matthews is the only concerning name.

Holy Mackerell, don't be so tough on Fackerell.

[pacman5252]

20 hours ago, Beast said:

I completely disagree about the DL not needing depth... and think the Packers poor DL depth has cost them over the years. I remember one year with Favre as starter, the defense was doing very well, until a DT got IRed for the year and Corey Williams (the Packers great 3rd down specialist), had to actually play the first two downs then and he struggled and they lost their 3rd down pass rush and couldn't get off the field.

I'm waiting to see Pettine's system, but I know some people have talked about the Packers running 3-3 which I think Wilkerson was being used as an Edge player as least at times. I think that will take some of the pressure off the edge players, and put more on the DL.

1. I never said we didn't need depth. I think though we are in a position where we don't need to spend a plus pick to get a starting caliber guy (especially with the holes on the edge and potential OL deficiencies). One of Lowry/Daniels/Wilk will be resigned. We'll be rolling with Clark, Adams, (signed guy), probably a stop gap Dial caliber DL, development depth (a 4th-6th rounder). On a roster that only needs 6 DL max, that pretty much fills it out.

2. We'll see what happens.