Jump to content

Packers Roster Cuts


Packerraymond

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

Go through the cuts and tell me about all the pass rushers who are CLEARLY better than Fackrell.  You just don’t find rotational pass rushers.  Even the Ahmad Brooks signing was an anomaly and that was fueled by the Niners wanting to save money.

You didn't understand my post. My point was that I looked at cut players to find an upgrade and I didn't see anyone I cared for. That's why I mentioned trading a draft pick to a OLB rich team like Denver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Nobody is going to cut an upgrade to Fackrell though...

Even if they do, it's tough even mid way on the waiver order to grab them, unless vets obviously. I certainly wouldn't be upset with Simon I suppose. I'm just at the point I want Fackrell gone so I don't read his name 45 times a week like he's the reason we didn't win the SB every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, St Vince said:

You didn't understand my post. My point was that I looked at cut players to find an upgrade and I didn't see anyone I cared for. That's why I mentioned trading a draft pick to a OLB rich team like Denver.

Probably a bit late for that- Denver only kept 4 OLB's.  

They kept 6 ILB's, largely for special teams purposes according to their coach.

I get the sentiment of finding a team that is rich at the position, but at this point for a team to give up a legitimate edge option, I would guess that it would require overpaying with a draft pick, or giving them a player in return where they have a weakness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

Probably a bit late for that- Denver only kept 4 OLB's.  

They kept 6 ILB's, largely for special teams purposes according to their coach.

I get the sentiment of finding a team that is rich at the position, but at this point for a team to give up a legitimate edge option, I would guess that it would require overpaying with a draft pick, or giving them a player in return where they have a weakness.

I know we're talking giving up picks, but at the same time it's going, hey Denver has what we wish we had, they should want to give us some of that. Like, if we're Denver fans, are we even considering it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

Probably a bit late for that- Denver only kept 4 OLB's.  

They kept 6 ILB's, largely for special teams purposes according to their coach.

I get the sentiment of finding a team that is rich at the position, but at this point for a team to give up a legitimate edge option, I would guess that it would require overpaying with a draft pick, or giving them a player in return where they have a weakness.

That's why I've been suggesting one of our receivers and a pick for Fowler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Norm said:

I know we're talking giving up picks, but at the same time it's going, hey Denver has what we wish we had, they should want to give us some of that. Like, if we're Denver fans, are we even considering it?

You mean that other teams don't want to give us their good players at low prices?  Well, they will never make it in retail sales!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

You mean that other teams don't want to give us their good players at low prices?  Well, they will never make it in retail sales!

Haha:)

I just think it's overlooked. We want Mack for less than we'd ever give him up for. I think most people want Ray over Barrett out of Denver but probably won't give up over the comp pick they'll likely get because he'll get more than he should because of position

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, St Vince said:

You didn't understand my post. My point was that I looked at cut players to find an upgrade and I didn't see anyone I cared for. That's why I mentioned trading a draft pick to a OLB rich team like Denver.

They're currently rostering 4 OLBs: Von Miller, Bradley Chubb, Shaq Barrett, and Shane Ray.  It's been mentioned enough times that Shane Ray doesn't fit the athletic thresholds that the Packers want from their pass rusher, so we're talking about making a deal for Shaq Barrett.  What do you think we're going to offer for him?  He's a FA at the end of the year, and he's got 11 sacks in the past 3 seasons.  The Packers aren't giving up much of anything for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Norm said:

Haha:)

I just think it's overlooked. We want Mack for less than we'd ever give him up for. I think most people want Ray over Barrett out of Denver but probably won't give up over the comp pick they'll likely get because he'll get more than he should because of position

I think you are totally correct.  

That's why I said to trade a pick, you would really have to over pay. 

You might get lucky with a player, but to use the Fowler example, they already have a set of guys that can do the 600-700 yard type of season, and a young guy in Chark, so to give up Fowler they probably would want Cobb and a pick or picks.

New England might be easier for a WR trade, but I don't know that their edge rushers are all that much.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

I think you are totally correct.  

That's why I said to trade a pick, you would really have to over pay. 

You might get lucky with a player, but to use the Fowler example, they already have a set of guys that can do the 600-700 yard type of season, and a young guy in Chark, so to give up Fowler they probably would want Cobb and a pick or picks.

New England might be easier for a WR trade, but I don't know that their edge rushers are all that much.

 

Yep and with Brady you are gone bet they raise up your guys where you might rather have the talent at OLB when you have it, that kind of thing. I know we all agree with this, until it comes to trades that help us, then it flips so it feels "fair," that kind of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

They're currently rostering 4 OLBs: Von Miller, Bradley Chubb, Shaq Barrett, and Shane Ray.  It's been mentioned enough times that Shane Ray doesn't fit the athletic thresholds that the Packers want from their pass rusher, so we're talking about making a deal for Shaq Barrett.  What do you think we're going to offer for him?  He's a FA at the end of the year, and he's got 11 sacks in the past 3 seasons.  The Packers aren't giving up much of anything for him.

Just found that out about them carrying 4 OLBs.  Oh Well guess we'll have to address it in FA and the draft next offseason.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...