Jump to content

The "Kick the Tires" Thread (Other Teams Cuts)


Packerraymond

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Leader said:

Ramsey's not a happening thing far as GB goes. Just not gonna happen.

He's a mini-AB with regards to potential team / locker room disruption - which this team stays away from like the plague regardless of talent. He's gonna want a new contract w/new + improved guarantees - which ain't happening in GB.

We've invested a ****load in our secondary. Draft capital primarily, but I think the FO sees that outlay and the depth it represents and figures its done for now.

Fitzpatrick would have been a nice add to our talent package IMO but it appears the FO deemed him a luxury not worth having. Oh well. It's not as if we lost any talent and as things broke out, I can take solace he didnt wind up with any of the top NFC organizations that were said to be sniffing around. That would have been a real bummer.

 

Ramsey is nothing close to AB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Packerraymond said:

Ramsey is nothing close to AB.

Well....its a "degree of difficulty" thing.....but I did call him a mini-AB.
GBs (apparent) modus operandi with guys that whisper: "I want this....." is to ship them out of town.

Regardless - I'll fall to the floor if GB gets seriously involved in any Ramsey chit-chat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Ramsey is happening simply due to the money. He's still under contract for what....another season? Either way, he has made it clear he wants a new deal which means he wants to be the new highest paid CB in the NFL. Gute just poured a ton of money into the defense in FA and we have the inevitable Clark extension coming up as well as perhaps a Blake Martinez extension. Just don't see GB allocating so much of their cap to one side of the ball while the offense continues to languish with subpar skill players and an aging QB

Edited by deltarich87
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Bears can trade for Mack and wrangle the salary cap to keep most everyone else...and the Vikes can re-sign all their home grown talent without losing anything but a journeyman DL (who is very good at rushing the passer), while giving Cousins a terrible contract, then....

The Packers could make a Ramsey contract work.  

I'll just say it.  Ramsey is immensely talented and I feel he just wants to win.  He'd fall in line with Rodgers as the undisputed leader of the team.

I feel the issue is two C's.  Compensation (draft picks) and Competition (everyone is gonna want him).

We will be interested, but we won't swing the deal.  It'll be too expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all we already have quality DB's who are not far from getting paid.  In multiples.  No way can we afford Ram.   Nor should we want him, great player and train wreck otherwise.

This would be a worse signing for the team than Mack would have been.  You give up loads of treasure and pay big money.   I much rather P Smith and Amos over Mack, especially when you consider the loot we give up in picks on top of it.  And Mack is a quality human being.  Ramsey is trash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

It'll be too expensive.

I like to play the card game WAR with these trade considerations
Let's say Ramsey is a "King" or an "Ace", but you currently have a 10 of diamonds at corner

How much will you pay to upgrade from a 10 to a King ?
Conversely, let's say you have a 5 at RT and can draft a Jack, how much would you pay for that upgrade ?

Its a zero sum game and you have to decide on the value it brings to your team. Of course Ramsey is a talented player - but when you combine the draft capital and the cap capital its an expensive upgrade AND it takes away the opportunity to find better and more impactful upgrades elsewhere.

Packers spent heavily on the defense with both 1sts, both 4ths and (3 ) high priced FAs in 2019.
Gute has to ask himself:

" Can the Packers afford to spend more on defense at the expense of the offense ? "
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Leader said:

Neal Driscoll:  The Dolphins aren’t done. There is some interest in RB Kenyan Drake. Chargers, Titans, Packers and 49ers have discussed with Miami

Huh...

Just saw Drake say to the media that he doesn't want to go anywhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, beekay414 said:

We're not going to find a plug n play tackle in the draft regardless. It'll be addressed via FA or they'll roll with Alex Light as the starter. I'm not worried about it one bit. There are multiple avenues to take so I'm not worried one bit. This ain't the Ted Thompson era anymore. 

I disagree.  I think a R1 OT could be plug 'n play.  Doesn't mean they wouldn't take their lumps, but I think you'd be overall pleased with them.  As for FA, you did just see the contract handed out to the FA OTs, right?  Trent Brown got 4/$66M from the Raiders, Ja'Wuan James got 4/$51M, etc.  Hell, even Matt Kalil got a 1 year, $7.5M deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, beekay414 said:

LIS, if we were so damn worried about Bulaga leaving, we would've addressed the OT spot when Andre Dillard fell into our laps TWICE last draft. But, ya know, y'all know better than Gute.

So the option was to leave a blackhole at FS and take Andre Dillard instead of Darnell Savage, and you're saying that conclusively proves that Gute isn't worried about the OT position?  No.  It's far more likely that Savage graded out higher than Dillard, which is why the Packers took Savage instead of Dillard.  With the exception of the Savage pick, the next time that an OT was drafted within 10 picks of the Packers pick was in the 6th round when the Browns drafted Drew Forbes 4 picks after drafting Ka'Dar Hollman.  The reality is there are only so many picks to be used as ammunition, some position is going to get neglected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

So the option was to leave a blackhole at FS and take Andre Dillard instead of Darnell Savage, and you're saying that conclusively proves that Gute isn't worried about the OT position?  No.  It's far more likely that Savage graded out higher than Dillard, which is why the Packers took Savage instead of Dillard.  With the exception of the Savage pick, the next time that an OT was drafted within 10 picks of the Packers pick was in the 6th round when the Browns drafted Drew Forbes 4 picks after drafting Ka'Dar Hollman.  The reality is there are only so many picks to be used as ammunition, some position is going to get neglected.

Bruh, we had 2 first round picks...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...