Mike Daniels released

[MaryTsraining3s]

2 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Adams (1.5), Lowry (3), and Lancaster (0) played 1181 snaps of defense last year and managed 4.5 sacks. Good for a sack every 262.4 snaps. 

Mike Daniels in his worst year of his career played 419 snaps and managed 2 sacks, good for a sack every 209.5 snaps. Again, the worst year of his career versus the best year of everybody else's career and he's still beating his supposed replacements by 25%. 

+++

Mike Daniels had 5 QB hits in 419 snaps (83.8 snaps).

Dean Lowry managed 5 QB hits in 698 snaps (139.6 snaps). Tyler Lancaster had 1 QB hit in 271 snaps (271). Montravius Adams had 2 QB hits in 212 snaps (106). Combining for a QB hit every 147.6 snaps.

+++

If the plan is to replace the worst year of Mike Daniels career with production from Lowry (who we know is merely serviceable look at those numbers, thank god we wrote that fat check!), Lancaster (A pure NT only type who has shown nothing in physical skillset or on field production to think he might at any point be pass rush capable) and Montravius Adams,  then damn we all better get on one knee and pray that Adams starts figuring this thing out. 

+++

Mike Daniels in 2017 played 630 snaps. And I get that it's in a different defense, and we're time removed, but hear me out here. He had a sack (5) every 130 snaps, and a QB hit (14) every 45 snaps. Two years ago Mike Daniels had a higher sack/snap rate than Dean Lowry had a QB hit/snap rate last year. 

And I get that a certain amount of pressure is going to come from the pressure package where we're going to get some production out of Gary and Z. Smith, but man alive, where is the pressure coming from on 1st and 10, 2nd and 5, 3rd and 3? Mike Pettine isn't Dom Capers. he doesn't run that much pressure package. We're not going to see the pressure package on 2nd and 6 with this dude. 

And we're really thinking this isn't going to be a loss?

You only address the pass rushing aspect here, why not mention how average to below average Daniels was against the run last year then add on the injury to his age on top of that? How much base defense did the Packers play last year? Not much. You bring in these big OLBs to play the Nickel, the formation you play the highest percentage of the time, with the hopes that they hold up against the run AND provide that pass rush pressure. You only have two Interior d lineman, one being Clark who will take up most of the snaps, and the other snaps going to the rotation of younger cheaper guys. You see it every year, but the coaching staff is raving left and right about Adams ( I will believe it when I see it from him though), but I understand taking the risk. Even on those 2nd and 6, 3rd and 3 downs, you are seeing more Nickel than ever before. 

[AlexGreen#20]

20 minutes ago, MaryTsraining3s said:

You only address the pass rushing aspect here, why not mention how average to below average Daniels was against the run last year then add on the injury to his age on top of that? How much base defense did the Packers play last year? Not much. You bring in these big OLBs to play the Nickel, the formation you play the highest percentage of the time, with the hopes that they hold up against the run AND provide that pass rush pressure. You only have two Interior d lineman, one being Clark who will take up most of the snaps, and the other snaps going to the rotation of younger cheaper guys. You see it every year, but the coaching staff is raving left and right about Adams ( I will believe it when I see it from him though), but I understand taking the risk. Even on those 2nd and 6, 3rd and 3 downs, you are seeing more Nickel than ever before. 

1. Pass rush matters way more than run defense.

2. Daniels was an adequate run defender. He wasn't good, he wasn't bad. He was average. Was Lowry a little better? Probably. He will be in this scheme. Doesn't mean Daniels is bad.

3. We play a ton of 4-2 Nickel so I don't get where you're point that having Clark negates the need for a 3T comes from.

[AlexGreen#20]

52 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

First off, your last sentence makes no sense, even though you're trying for sarcasm. Dude threw 2 picks last year. If anything knock his TD %, YPA or completion % to prove your point.

Second our DL group I look at about equal to our WR group. Could totally be trash or it could be set for awhile, we'll wait and see.

How do you correctly identify it as sarcasm, and not see the point being made? It's not a criticism of Rodgers, it's a criticism of the narrative that you can't discuss the possibility of cutting a guy not working out because "you don't know what will happen in the future"

Who on this DL group has flashed anything close to the ceiling of MVS/EQ?

[incognito_man]

2 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

How do you correctly identify it as sarcasm, and not see the point being made? It's not a criticism of Rodgers, it's a criticism of the narrative that you can't discuss the possibility of cutting a guy not working out because "you don't know what will happen in the future"

Who on this DL group has flashed anything close to the ceiling of MVS/EQ?

With the Lowry extension and the praise for Adams it's clear the staff felt good about who we have at the position and felt comfortable releasing Daniels (who did not play well in 2018). The cliche is that it's better to release a guy a year too early than a year late. I don't agree that releasing Daniels made us worse. Did it make us worse in September? Sure, maybe. Did it make us worse in Dec/Jan? We will see, but it's clear the staff felt better about giving reps to the young, ascending players rather than Daniels in 2019.

The question boils down to: Is the combination of Lowry, Adams, Gary, Z Smith, etc. absorbing, and growing from Daniels reps makes us better in 5-6 months than Daniels makes us? Staff thought "yes".

[MaryTsraining3s]

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

1. Pass rush matters way more than run defense.

2. Daniels was an adequate run defender. He wasn't good, he wasn't bad. He was average. Was Lowry a little better? Probably. He will be in this scheme. Doesn't mean Daniels is bad.

3. We play a ton of 4-2 Nickel so I don't get where you're point that having Clark negates the need for a 3T comes from.

1. Which is why they bring in 3 different options in FA and the draft along with "Sack"-rell to apply pressure, not having to rely on a 30 year old IDL coming off a foot injury to be their best option.

2. Going off of 1, you put better run stoppers out there, rely on the new edge pieces you bring in, grand scheme is you improved both areas while getting younger/cheaper. 

3. You must have misunderstood what I was saying, or more likely, I didn't make it very clear: Clark is taking majority of snaps at one DT position, so that leaves only so many snaps left. You play your best run defender on obvious running downs, as you agreed that would be Lowry. So you are paying $10 million this year to Daniels to be a situational pass rusher?

I was angry to see Daniels go as well, but I can understand why they did it. I'm not trying to convince you your opinion is wrong, just stating my opinion. 

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, MaryTsraining3s said:

1. Which is why they bring in 3 different options in FA and the draft along with "Sack"-rell to apply pressure, not having to rely on a 30 year old IDL coming off a foot injury to be their best option.

2. Going off of 1, you put better run stoppers out there, rely on the new edge pieces you bring in, grand scheme is you improved both areas while getting younger/cheaper. 

3. You must have misunderstood what I was saying, or more likely, I didn't make it very clear: Clark is taking majority of snaps at one DT position, so that leaves only so many snaps left. You play your best run defender on obvious running downs, as you agreed that would be Lowry. So you are paying $10 million this year to Daniels to be a situational pass rusher?

I was angry to see Daniels go as well, but I can understand why they did it. I'm not trying to convince you your opinion is wrong, just stating my opinion. 

1. You know what's better than having 3 guys getting pressure? Having 4 guys getting pressure. It's nonsense to say, well I've got good players at 3 front line positions, so it doesn't matter what happening at the 4th. 

2. See #1.

3. The game isn't divided between run downs and pass downs. Daniels was our second best guy on all those hybrid downs

[MaryTsraining3s]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

1. You know what's better than having 3 guys getting pressure? Having 4 guys getting pressure. It's nonsense to say, well I've got good players at 3 front line positions, so it doesn't matter what happening at the 4th. 

2. See #1.

3. The game isn't divided between run downs and pass downs. Daniels was our second best guy on all those hybrid downs

1-3. I wish we could forget the salary cap exists. 

[AlexGreen#20]

3 hours ago, MaryTsraining3s said:

1-3. I wish we could forget the salary cap exists. 

Are we competing this year or not?

[MaryTsraining3s]

20 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Are we competing this year or not?

Yes....with a salary cap in place.

[AlexGreen#20]

2 minutes ago, MaryTsraining3s said:

Yes....with a salary cap in place.

Are you under the impression that we would have been disqualified from the season if Mike Daniels money was still on our books?

[squire12]

30 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Are we competing this year or not?

Was keeping Mike Daniels the only piece to ensure that GB was competing in 2019?

[Norm]

6 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Was keeping Mike Daniels the only piece to ensure that GB was competing in 2019?

No, but we talked about doing everything to get that last piece that could push you over the edge for years, then we cut one of those right before TC.

[packfanfb]

9 minutes ago, Norm said:

No, but we talked about doing everything to get that last piece that could push you over the edge for years, then we cut one of those right before TC.

There's an assumption in there that Daniels qualifies as a "missing piece." At 30, coming off injury, I'm of the opinion that Mont. Adams is much closer to Daniels in 2019 than Daniels is to Fletcher Cox, Atkins or Chris Jones, etc. 

[Norm]

5 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

There's an assumption in there that Daniels qualifies as a "missing piece." At 30, coming off injury, I'm of the opinion that Mont. Adams is much closer to Daniels in 2019 than Daniels is to Fletcher Cox, Atkins or Chris Jones, etc. 

You would get hard over the idea of signing Daniels if he was just cut by someone else. Let's be real.

 

You were just floating signing some Joe blow also-ran linebacker last week. Someone clearly worse than Daniels. You've never asked for them to be Fletcher Cox level studs to be worthy of a missing piece.

Edited July 30, 2019 by Norm

[boratt]

Let’s see how Clark, Adams, Lowry, Lancaster, Z and Gary play on the DL before we judge this move. And let’s see how Daniels plays too. All of it goes in. Too early to throw any fits or have any celebrations.