Contract years, Cobb vs CMJ.

[CWood21]

10 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

If my choice is keep the current crop of safeties, or EDGE players, I'm keeping the safeties. However that isn't the choice. We have every start at OL under contract next year, plenty of money for HHCD and if we let Cobb and Matthews go, plenty of money for other positions to, so my answer is none. I'm going to draft two EDGE players, I might look for a vet in FA, I'm bringing back HHCD and I'm going to draft some OL too.

So you're essentially punting the safety position right?  Based off what you said, you trust a guy like Kentrell Brice to do his job better than Clay Matthews.  That's a fine stance to take, but when Brice whiffs in coverage you bet you're going to be there complaining about the lack of investment into the safety position.

[Kepler]

Can't address everything in the draft. I'd keep this safety group and draft a bunch of EDGE and OL

[Packerraymond]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

So you're essentially punting the safety position right?  Based off what you said, you trust a guy like Kentrell Brice to do his job better than Clay Matthews.  That's a fine stance to take, but when Brice whiffs in coverage you bet you're going to be there complaining about the lack of investment into the safety position.

Nah I can sign a safety for dirt cheap. Morgan is making what 2.5 in Pitt? I'd like Brice to establish himself long term, but I can get a vet to challenge him for nothing much.

I can get a cheap vet for depth on the OL too, add in Madison and another DP and there's 3 new OL to go with a group that doesn't have a pending FA.

I'm going to use a majority of capital on EDGE because that's the most important position and one you absolutely can't punt and it's the number one reason Dom flopped out and Ted's gone.

[TheOnlyThing]

4 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

The point I was trying to make was that his current sack total is misleading.  I think that's something we'd all agree upon.  While the numbers might not be there, he's still getting production. 

2018 Defensive Snaps/Sacks at OLB:

Clay 236 (.5 sacks -- or 1.5 without the bogus Alex Smith RTP call);

Perry 187 (1.5);

Gilbert 151 (1.5); and 

Fackrell 91 (3).

Clay has played MORE snaps than any other OLBer.

He is simply not "getting production" or anywhere near the type of production that would justify his $11M+ salary.

As a featured pass rusher, Clay had 6.5, 5, and 7.5 sacks over the prior 3 seasons. 

IT IS TIME .. to move on.

 

[CWood21]

5 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said:

IT IS TIME .. to move on.

And if he has that jump in production, are you still going to be beating this drum?  My guess is you're either going to either focus on another player (HHCD seems like a prime candidate) or you're going to change your reasoning for why Clay shouldn't be retained.  First it was Fackrell and House, now it's Clay, who knows who is next.  I've already prefaced my comments by saying if he's willing to take a reasonable deal and he's got a reasonable amount of production by the end of the season.  You're the one whose ready to jettison him right now.

[CWood21]

14 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Nah I can sign a safety for dirt cheap. Morgan is making what 2.5 in Pitt? I'd like Brice to establish himself long term, but I can get a vet to challenge him for nothing much.

I can get a cheap vet for depth on the OL too, add in Madison and another DP and there's 3 new OL to go with a group that doesn't have a pending FA.

I'm going to use a majority of capital on EDGE because that's the most important position and one you absolutely can't punt and it's the number one reason Dom flopped out and Ted's gone.

And that's a reasonable stance to take.  But again, when the S position falters you're going to be complaining about the position?  There's a reason why teams don't usually pump a ton of resources into one position.  If you're investing that much into one position, you're neglecting another.

[Packerraymond]

7 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

And that's a reasonable stance to take.  But again, when the S position falters you're going to be complaining about the position?  There's a reason why teams don't usually pump a ton of resources into one position.  If you're investing that much into one position, you're neglecting another.

We won a SB with Charlie Peprah. I'm OK there. Pass rusher is far more important.

[Mr. Fussnputz]

30 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I'm abundantly aware of the situation regarding Bulaga.  But he'll be 30 years old by the time the draft rolls around, has only played a full 16 games slate twice in his 8 seasons in the NFL, and he's due another $8.35M next year.  That's a ticking time bomb as far as I'm concerned.  So you've invested your top 64 picks into a pair of EDGE and a S, what happens if/when Bulaga gets hurt?  Or what happens if Jimmy Graham regresses hard next year?  You've essentially punted those position until next year.

If you will read my post carefully, I said I would look to FA for a safety. Yes, I would put the 2 #1's into OLB. That is the strength of the 2018 draft, so there should be good value for those two picks. That's what I meant by go heavy at OLB. That still leaves 2-4 for TE, WR, T. And 5-6 for interior OL. 

But having said that, I think the best thing for the health of the roster is to use the top picks (1-3) on BPA. As it works out, it IS highly probable that 2 #1s might very well be OLBs, because of the make up of the draft pool. 

I'm not a HaHa fan. It appears he doesn't have the short area quickness, and teams have exploited that several times already this season in the red zone. I would let him walk and sign someone else in FA. 

So I'm willing to go into next season with our current DL, ILBs, corner group (minus House and add Breeland), a FA replacement for HaHa with Brice/Jones/Williams competing for the other spot, and Perry/Fackrell/renegotiated Clay/Gilbert/and two #1s. 

Offense with current QBs, current IOL group with another C/G mid-round pick, current T-TE groups with two additions for each group in the 2/3 round, and roll with current RB group. And I'm OK rolling with the current WR group (minus Cobb): Adams/Allison/MVS/ EQ/Kumerow/Moore (and a little Ty in the slot). Maybe replace Moore, if he fails to develop, with a low round pick or UDFA. (I'm not a Moore fan. Someone compared him to Robert Ferguson, and I think that's a good comparison.)

 

[TheOnlyThing]

13 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I'll pose the same question to you as I did PR, if you're using the same amount of resources in the OLB position as we did this past draft with CBs,

The bolded text reveals the crux of the disconnect. 

Some are apparently operating under the assumption that the Packers will (or can) only improve the roster through the draft and with undrafted rookie free agents. That is an understandable position to take given what transpired in the recent past.

However, Gute appears willing to use all avenues, not just the draft, to address roster deficiencies. This includes veteran free agency and even player trades.

Just look at what he did at CB so far in 2018. Gute spent his top 2 picks on Alexander and Jackson to help fill the massive void at CB and also signed Tramon and later Breeland. 

Thus, even if Gute were to use his top 2 picks in 2019 to address OLB, I am confident that he would still at least attempt to try and fill other roster needs by signing or trading for players. 

Consequently, even if we go heavy in the draft at OLB next year all is not lost elsewhere -- especially if Cobb and Matthews' big $ contracts come off the books.

[Cheech]

Typically when a draft is seen as deep at one position, that position suffers in free agency.  

Maybe that means we get Clay back for a decent value.  Maybe we get a free agent edge rusher for decent value plus a few draft picks. 

Either way it is blatantly clear we need an instant upgrade on the edge.

[TheOnlyThing]

Cobb and Clay were once good players. That was some time ago.

Between 2015-2018, Clay Matthews averaged 5.6 sacks per season (22.5 in total, no more than 7.5 in any season). During that time his combined cap hit amounted to nearly $53,000,000.

Between 2015-2018, Randall Cobb averaged 60 receptions, 620 yards, 10.1 YPC, and 4 TDs per season. During that time his combined cap hit amounted to nearly $40,000,000.

By any objective measure, both Clay and Cobb greatly underperformed their contracts.

Getting out from under these bloated contracts is a great way to start the offseason.

[{Family Ghost}]

1 minute ago, TheOnlyThing said:

Cobb and Clay were once good players. That was some time ago.

Between 2015-2018, Clay Matthews averaged 5.6 sacks per season (22.5 in total, no more than 7.5 in any season). During that time his combined cap hit amounted to nearly $53,000,000.

Between 2015-2018, Randall Cobb averaged 60 receptions, 620 yards, 10.1 YPC, and 4 TDs per season. During that time his combined cap hit amounted to nearly $40,000,000.

By any objective measure, both Clay and Cobb greatly underperformed their contracts.

Getting out from under these bloated contracts is a great way to start the offseason.

Agreed .. time to move on.  Both of those guys were once good Packers player and I will cherish the memories they have given me thru the years.  

[Arthur Penske]

say what you will about their play in recent years, those guys were good dudes. I’ll miss them

 

[pacman5252]

I wonder how much interest Clay gets in FA? If we got Clay on a Connor Barwin level contract (like 2 years, 2M per) I'd still take him as a part time rusher and ILB.

[MacReady]

Sorry, but I want them both back unless some team prices them out of Green Bay.  Let them see what their market is.  If they get paid, great for them.  If not, they'll sign for their value here and we'll get two great people who still have a role on the team.