Donzo Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 5 minutes ago, Golfman said: You seem to think they are similar talent, I would say they are not. What? They're both too expensive- Smith too much money and Ford isn't worth the double dip asset expenditure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 11 minutes ago, Cpdaly23 said: If we never gave players contract extensions because they hadn’t produced monster numbers prior to a contract year, we would have never resigned Davonte Adams. Some players just take longer to hit their stride. Adams was a big producer in 2016 and 2017 (especially factoring in his production without Rodgers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 5 minutes ago, Donzo said: What? They're both too expensive- Smith too much money and Ford isn't worth the double dip asset expenditure. Ok, I misunderstood what you were saying then. You do understand we're going to have to overpay to upgrade the EDGE position in free agency. It will not be accomplished this year via draft alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 15 minutes ago, Golfman said: Ok, I misunderstood what you were saying then. You do understand we're going to have to overpay to upgrade the EDGE position in free agency. It will not be accomplished this year via draft alone. OK... And, no, I don't understand that... Especially on a guy with awful back problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 17 minutes ago, Donzo said: OK... And, no, I don't understand that... Especially on a guy with awful back problems. You need multiple EDGE players that are not currently on our roster. Matthews is not coming back and if they do he's not the answer. Perry, do you seriously want to count on him? Please don't tell me Fackrell is your answer at one EDGE position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 For the record, I'm not saying I'd be livid if we traded for Ford. I'd be pretty bummed, but equally excited if we traded a 2nd round pick for him. I'd be absolutely fine with a third. I don't like the idea of giving big contracts to unproven players after their contract years (it's my biggest issue with free agency). I understand sometimes it takes risks to build a good team, but I'm more guarded in my risks than most. I see more value in Houston/Suggs/Wake/Lynch/Ray at significantly smaller contracts plus 12th overall, and also less risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 I just think #44 is too rich for Ford; I would want change back. Something like #44 and #114 for Ford and #63 might work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 I'd add up the need for Dee Ford like this. Is he a great pass rusher - no. Would he upgrade what the Packers have now - yes. Is the need for a veteran pass rusher and a high draft pick mandated - no, but that needs some explanation. First, Pettine gets pressure from several places, not just with OLB pass rushers. Second, if you get a sought-after veteran (especially at a premium position), expect to pay a lot - and if they cost a high pick as well, that's another potential quality player lost, one that could have been had for several years at the slotted rookie wage. I'm expecting Perry to stay on the team (his contract suggest to me that 2020 is the earliest he is let go). I think Matthews might be allowed to walk as his contract has ended this year. What someone like Dee Ford gives you is a somewhat higher chance of acceptable OLB play (being a vet) and I don't think that is enough to overcome the monetary and pick cost. If there was no pick cost I'd be much happier with the deal, expensive or not. There are several highly though of pass rushers in this draft and a good chance one of them will be the Packers first pick. Just one good player there can transform the OLB unit. One scenario where it does makes more sense acquiring Ford, is if the Packers get a high-pick penetrating DE type (Wilkins/Oliver, maybe Gary) rather than an OLB type in round one. For example DE/OT in round one, then a day 2 OLB like Omenihu, Winovich, Jackson. In that scenario a veteran gives the Packers more security. I still wouldn't recommend the Ford trade, but I understand it more. There is yet another possibility, that the Packers go for Devin White or Devin Bush. They would probably be used to help generate more pass rush themselves, albeit more inside than out. I view that as a similar scenario as the one where they go DE early. What I am spending a lot of time saying is that pressure can comes from several places, which makes the specific position of OLB less critical from the standpoint of generating more pressures and sacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PACKRULE Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 40 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: For the record, I'm not saying I'd be livid if we traded for Ford. I'd be pretty bummed, but equally excited if we traded a 2nd round pick for him. I'd be absolutely fine with a third. I don't like the idea of giving big contracts to unproven players after their contract years (it's my biggest issue with free agency). I understand sometimes it takes risks to build a good team, but I'm more guarded in my risks than most. I see more value in Houston/Suggs/Wake/Lynch/Ray at significantly smaller contracts plus 12th overall, and also less risk. This all day. Wait for Houston to get release. Offer him a good deal. I think he fits more to what we do anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 I mean, it's entirely possible that Ford gets traded during the draft when a team misses out on all the pass rushers they liked and are willing to meet the Chiefs price at that moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 8 minutes ago, PACKRULE said: This all day. Wait for Houston to get release. Offer him a good deal. I think he fits more to what we do anyway. Avoiding that 2nd round pick cost sounds good to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSG Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 Mixed feelings about Ford. When it comes to putting pressure on the QB last year, he was elite. He's easily and by a large margin better than any edge rusher we've currently got on the roster. I'd seen that he lead all Edge Rushers in "pressures" this last year. I'm leery that KC's price is so cheap and I'n not super excited about paying a player HUGE money that you just had to trade a high pick for. Saying that though, our piss poor front office has been nothing short of terrible when it's come to drafting over the last 4 or 5 years. We've thrown damn near 100% of our quality picks at a defense that is still terrible If we trade #44 for Ford, we know we're getting production (whether that production is first 16-17 million a year is what is risky) instead of a guy who's probably a 25% chance of being a starter in 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrettFavre004 Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 I'd prefer to target Houston, still playing at an incredibly high level, isn't quite the gamble, won't be as long term a deal, little to no compensation. I love that we have Mike Smith as OLB coach. Having an elite QB and Smith there gotta make GB at least somewhat appealing to either Ford or Houston. But I could live with Ford. I would hope a contract extension is closer to 16-17 per for 5 years, not the 19 sportrac was predicting although that really kind of the going rate for the 2nd tier of edge guys. But I've seen around twitter, 44 and either or 5th or 6th for Ford and their 3rd or 4th. I could live with that. Solidifying our edge spot, free'ing up pick 12 a lot for BPA, and essentially just looking for a possible guard/tackle option in the 4th round instead of the 2nd, strangely almost more appealing for GB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{Family Ghost} Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 1 hour ago, PossibleCabbage said: I just think #44 is too rich for Ford; I would want change back. Something like #44 and #114 for Ford and #63 might work. I just don't want to give up a top 50 talent in this draft and also have to pay big coin for Ford. I think I would offer the Chiefs a 3rd or (2) 4th, and call it good. If that's not good enough then move on. I heard the other issue is that Ford's agent may want a lot of guaranteed money in this new deal .. not sure the Packers are even up for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrettFavre004 Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 Dee Ford + Justin Houston + 4th 2nd + 6th + Nick Perry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.