Jump to content

2020 NFL Draft Discussion


CWood21

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

You don’t fail at QB in this league anymore unless you suck.

Yeah, tell that to David Carr who got crushed in five years with the Houston Texans, playing behind appalling O lines. With a better team he might have been something, but by the time he left Houston he was ruined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, CWood21 said:

That's the case with any team.  How many offenses are going to be fine without their #1 WR?

If you lose your number #1 WR you will always have a problem.

But in Rodgers career we have never been anything like as reliant on one player to prop up the receivers core. In years gone past MVS would have been a WR4 and Geronimo would be a WR5. Its the weakest group of receivers we have had for a very long time. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nick_gb said:

Interesting that you reference Sitton / Lang as reasons not to resign Bulaga but don't mention Tauscher and Clifton and then the drafting of Sherrod as reasons why you probably should. The thing is if you're depending on Aaron Rodgers to get you to a Super Bowl again and that's what you're hanging your hat on then you protect that Quarterback no matter what it takes. INCLUDING if it means resigning Bulaga at market value and ESPECIALLY when you have one of the best contract negotiators in the business. 

Fair enough.

But ...

By a significant margin, the best ways to predict injuries is age and injury history. Bulaga is extremely high risk. If his knee goes next training camp and you have no RT then there can be no complaining about bad luck, no getting upset about the size of our injury list, no whining about Packers IR just that an acceptance that you've taken a significant risk on an ageing player with an extensive injury history and it hasn't worked out. 

I'm happy to take the risk and pay market rate on a year-on-year basis but I wouldn't be prepared to give a sizeable multi-year deal to a player whose body is probably not going to last. 

You've got to back yourself to find a replacement.

Talking Bulaga into a one-year deal and drafting an OT early is ideal but would be tricky to achieve. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, mikemike778 said:

Fair enough.

But ...

By a significant margin, the best ways to predict injuries is age and injury history. Bulaga is extremely high risk. If his knee goes next training camp and you have no RT then there can be no complaining about bad luck, no getting upset about the size of our injury list, no whining about Packers IR just that an acceptance that you've taken a significant risk on an ageing player with an extensive injury history and it hasn't worked out. 

I'm happy to take the risk and pay market rate on a year-on-year basis but I wouldn't be prepared to give a sizeable multi-year deal to a player whose body is probably not going to last. 

You've got to back yourself to find a replacement.

Talking Bulaga into a one-year deal and drafting an OT early is ideal but would be tricky to achieve. 

If I'm Bulaga and he makes it through the season relatively clean, injury wise, I'm not giving anyone a hometown discount and signing for the most guaranteed money I can get. It will clearly be his last chance to cash in. 

That's why the Packers seem unlikely to be his 2020 landing spot. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mikemike778 said:

If you lose your number #1 WR you will always have a problem.

But in Rodgers career we have never been anything like as reliant on one player to prop up the receivers core. In years gone past MVS would have been a WR4 and Geronimo would be a WR5. Its the weakest group of receivers we have had for a very long time. 

So because we've been insanely stacked at WR over the course of Rodgers' career, we should hold that same standard?  How many Day 2 picks did we invest on WR in Rodgers' earlier years?  Between 2005-11, we took 5 WRs in the top 96 picks which is the course of 7 drafts.  That's a TON of investment into that position.  What position are you willing to neglect in order to beef up our WR corps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mikemike778 said:

I'm happy to take the risk and pay market rate on a year-on-year basis but I wouldn't be prepared to give a sizeable multi-year deal to a player whose body is probably not going to last. 

You've got to back yourself to find a replacement.

Talking Bulaga into a one-year deal and drafting an OT early is ideal but would be tricky to achieve. 

You won't get Bulaga on a one year deal, it just isn't going to happen.

He'll either get a multi year deal in Green Bay or elsewhere, and given the chronic shortage of NFL calibre OTs, he'll find a spot for good money. So, since option 1 is off the table, you have to look at alternatives.

Unless you get an expensive veteran replacement (and they will be VERY expensive, given the need for OTs I've already mentioned), you are going to have a huge dropoff at that spot......and if you ARE willing to pay big bucks, you might as well keep Bulaga.

Spending a high draft pick is no guarantee of quality at that spot, but will probably be the best option this year whether or not Bulaga's contract is renewed. Personally, I'd rather spend a pick a round or maybe even two rounds later for a raw talent, and let him learn behind Bulaga ( maybe even fill in at guard for a year or two). There are no guarantees there either, but a high (or high-ish) draft pick does buy time, allowing a second bite in the 2021 draft, if the 2020 pick totally bombs.

While I agree injury history is a decent predictor of future health, I also believe that when a player is playing as well as Bulaga is now, it changes things, you go the extra mile to find a way to continue that. If Bulaga DOES get injured early next year, then the Packers rolled the dice, they came up snake eyes, and they have to bite the bullet - in that circumstance you have to hope Light or Turner or the rookie can stand in - sub-optimal, but most injury replacements are exactly that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be happy to offer Bulaga a 3-year contract with a reasonable exit after 1-2 years. Yeah, I do understand the better a year too early than a year too late, but we are approaching the end of AR's career and I'd rather have everything go down in 2 years at hte same time but at least have the best tools we can in this short span.

Regarding the WR, I'm pretty sure Gute would have loved spending a 2nd round pick on a WR like McLaurin, but his choices come from having a couple horrible drafts where we wasted a lot of picks in the secondary. He has to make a choice and OL is much more important than your receiving corps when you have a guy at QB who already had a few injuries the last years and loves a little too much holding onto the ball. Defense also needed to be adressed. We have only spent less capital at our ILBs and RBs, which makes sense when you take into account positional value. Stop bitching about our corps, WRs are sexy, but there's always going to be a weak link on the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

So because we've been insanely stacked at WR over the course of Rodgers' career, we should hold that same standard?  How many Day 2 picks did we invest on WR in Rodgers' earlier years?  Between 2005-11, we took 5 WRs in the top 96 picks which is the course of 7 drafts.  That's a TON of investment into that position.  What position are you willing to neglect in order to beef up our WR corps?

You need a balance. 

You are right a ton of investment was made between 2005-2011 - arguably too much.   The current team has seriously neglected the position to the point of negligence. You need somewhere in the middle. 

Its not a matter of what position am I prepared to neglect. The investment in the defence in the last few years has been insane. We should be able to play seriously good defence next year whilst finally investing in the offence properly. If the defence needs to have most of the early picks thrown at it yet again to be successful then I would have serious question marks about everyone who has anything to do with the defensive coaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Golfman said:

If I'm Bulaga and he makes it through the season relatively clean, injury wise, I'm not giving anyone a hometown discount and signing for the most guaranteed money I can get. It will clearly be his last chance to cash in. 

That's why the Packers seem unlikely to be his 2020 landing spot. 

It depends what he wants to do with his career - he may be at the point where he is set for life for a couple of generations and wants to play for the Packers. Given he supposedly refused a pay-cut though I suspect that's unlikely.

But yeah from a career earnings point of view, he would be best getting everything he can from this deal. There's a good chance this isn't going to be a good deal for the franchise that signs it.

The only way I see Packers signing him if that's the case is if the medical staff think Rodgers is physically pretty much done and has maybe another couple of seasons max. In that scenario, you maybe do truly go all-in and give him a contracts that works for a few years and is then really messy after that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mikemike778 said:

It depends what he wants to do with his career - he may be at the point where he is set for life for a couple of generations and wants to play for the Packers. Given he supposedly refused a pay-cut though I suspect that's unlikely.

But yeah from a career earnings point of view, he would be best getting everything he can from this deal. There's a good chance this isn't going to be a good deal for the franchise that signs it.

The only way I see Packers signing him if that's the case is if the medical staff think Rodgers is physically pretty much done and has maybe another couple of seasons max. In that scenario, you maybe do truly go all-in and give him a contracts that works for a few years and is then really messy after that.

We'll know this draft if they think that because we'll be pulling the trigger on his replacement if they do. I'm not seeing it to the extend you'd think he's done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see what the market is on Bulaga. With how he's played, I'm definitely interested in bringing him back and trying to develop a guy from round 3 for insurance, but he might be getting priced out on a risk/reward standpoint. I can realistically see a desperate team thinking he can play to 35 and giving him something stupid (like 4 years,  50M with like 30 guaranteed), which I'd want no part of. I think 2 years 20ish (maybe 13M guaranteed... year 1 fully, year with like 2-3M) is fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

It will be interesting to see what the market is on Bulaga. With how he's played, I'm definitely interested in bringing him back and trying to develop a guy from round 3 for insurance, but he might be getting priced out on a risk/reward standpoint. I can realistically see a desperate team thinking he can play to 35 and giving him something stupid (like 4 years,  50M with like 30 guaranteed), which I'd want no part of. I think 2 years 20ish (maybe 13M guaranteed... year 1 fully, year with like 2-3M) is fair.

If you look at O-lines across the league right now, that is precisely what is going to happen.  Bulaga is going to get one more big fat payday out of another teams sheer desperation.  I would say there are at least 8 teams in the league who would be willing to offer him that 4 year deal that youre implying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...