2021 GB Roster & Free Agents

[Packerraymond]

14 hours ago, packfanfb said:

 

The counter-point on King. Unless you can make the excuse that he was poorly used (which frankly sounds like a cop-out), King is the very definition of an "average" (at best) CB. Per the numbers, he's actually less than that over his 4-year career. Can we win with that? Well, we can at least get to conference championship games with it apparently. 

We'll be talking about this move a lot during the season. Hope it works out. 

I still don't know why anyone takes PFF grades of DBs seriously. 

Everyone's "OMG we should've signed this guy instead" Malcolm Butler, compared to King over the last 3 years:

TDs allowed per game: King .25 per game ; Butler .365 per game

Completion % : King 58.73 ; Butler 63.25%

Yards per game : King 46.71 ; Butler 53

QBR against: King 91.7 ; Butler 91.97

Seems like he's just as good as who we wanted. He just need to clean up the tackling and stay healthy.

[JBURGE]

38 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

That post June 1 for Lowry might be on the table if the Packers sign a DT or double up in the draft perhaps. To me, gaining cap still comes down to 2 players: Rodgers and Adams. 

We don't get the money until June 1 so we can't use it anyway, and if we do that it will go on next year's dead cap. Next year doesn't look great right now so I think it would make more sense to just cut him without the June 1 designation if we do. At that point what are we adding for $3m. 

[TransientTexan]

13 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I still don't know why anyone takes PFF grades of DBs seriously. 

Everyone's "OMG we should've signed this guy instead" Malcolm Butler, compared to King over the last 3 years:

TDs allowed per game: King .25 per game ; Butler .365 per game

Completion % : King 58.73 ; Butler 63.25%

Yards per game : King 46.71 ; Butler 53

QBR against: King 91.7 ; Butler 91.97

Seems like he's just as good as who we wanted. He just need to clean up the tackling and stay healthy.

I think part of the problem is that not all CB’s are asked to do the same things, so they sometimes end up comparing apples and oranges.
 

Back when TWill & Shields were starters, TWill would draw most of the tough assignments in the initial years. PFF would have him graded worse than Shields. But eventually, one season the roles were flipped and Shields started drawing the tougher assignments than TWill, and their PFF grades flipped, with Shields’ grades falling and TWill’s grades rising. So PFF is not always able to parse out those types of differences in role.
 

They might not fully capture that the reason you aren’t being targeting is because your defense just happens to have an even weaker link somewhere else in coverage. Or because your defense just happens to have a better pass rush so you don’t have to hold up in coverage as long as a CB on another team. If your front-7 is really good in run defense, your own weaknesses vs. the run might not be exposed as much (you can’t be docked for what would have been a missed tackle if the runner never reaches your area to begin with). Also I think slot CB’s tend to have higher grades than the boundary guys for some reason. 

 

 

[cannondale]

I thought Rodgers and the Packers were in talks about his contract ?? Is that not true ?? Or just that nobody knows for sure ?? Does it have something to do with paying his bonus ?? I suck at contract stuff

Edited March 24, 2021 by cannondale

[packfanfb]

53 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I still don't know why anyone takes PFF grades of DBs seriously. 

Everyone's "OMG we should've signed this guy instead" Malcolm Butler, compared to King over the last 3 years:

TDs allowed per game: King .25 per game ; Butler .365 per game

Completion % : King 58.73 ; Butler 63.25%

Yards per game : King 46.71 ; Butler 53

QBR against: King 91.7 ; Butler 91.97

Seems like he's just as good as who we wanted. He just need to clean up the tackling and stay healthy.

The last one is a pretty significant problem though. I just hope King's injuries haven't taken a toll on his body. He's still young, but last year he looked like he was running in cement at times, a far cry from the 4.4 athlete at the combine. Hopefully that was temporary due to some lingering injuries. 

 

[packfanfb]

3 minutes ago, cannondale said:

I thought Rodgers and the Packers were in talks about his contract ?? Is that not true ?? Or just that nobody knows for sure ??

No one really knows. Silver is the only one claiming they are "working" on it. Demovsky then reported that nothing has happened to date. The entire thing is a mess. The Love fiasco has brought us here and now Rodgers is pissed, wants a commitment from the Packers and we are likely weighing the risk/reward of those options. 

[cannondale]

3 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

No one really knows. Silver is the only one claiming they are "working" on it. Demovsky then reported that nothing has happened to date. The entire thing is a mess. The Love fiasco has brought us here and now Rodgers is pissed, wants a commitment from the Packers and we are likely weighing the risk/reward of those options. 

Thanks. But I gotta disagree with the Love thing being a fiasco. I don't think it factors in as much as some believe. And I doubt Rodgers is pissed. The Rodgers vs Packers thing ? I'm not buying it

Edited March 24, 2021 by cannondale

[skibrett15]

6 hours ago, pacman5252 said:

I agree Dean a bench/low end starter. I was more arguing that considering the dead cap implications and the fact we’d only save 3.3m, he’s worth keeping. We aren’t getting someone better for 3.3 or less.

I think that we can.  I don't see why not.  Bench/low end players don't make 3.3 or 4.8 M (post June 1 cut). Especially in this market.

[cannondale]

3 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

I think that we can.  I don't see why not.  Bench/low end players don't make 3.3 or 4.8 M (post June 1 cut). Especially in this market.

As of this moment, cutting him leaves you with Clark, Keke, Rush. Not a good situation to be in. Sometimes deserve has nothing to do with it. 

[packfanfb]

7 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Thanks. But I gotta disagree with the Love thing being a fiasco. I don't think it factors in as much as some believe. And I doubt Rodgers is pissed

The whole "natural passing of the torch" from a declining Rodgers to Love is now gone. Packers have 2 choices: 

1. Invest in 12 for another 3+ years and have Love sit the bench his entire rookie deal (by that point, Love probably requests a trade), but either way, you've wasted that period where Love is at his cheapest.  
2. Commit to Love and prematurely trade a HOF QB still playing at an MVP level. 

If the Packers do the former, the Love pick was a bust. 

If the Packers do the latter, they're cutting their SB window down by a year or two. 

The Packers gambled. They gambled on Rodgers not ever being 2020 Rodgers again, which frankly is weird because everyone expected him to be better in year 2 of MLF's system. Rodgers then exceeded expectations, creating this predicament. The Packers probably should have waited a few more years and then drafted the future QB, but they made that move in 2020. Now they're caught in the middle.  

[skibrett15]

To me, worst case you sign a pu pu platter of Lawrence Guy, Jurrell Casey, and maybe Danny Shelton for $1M each, and just see what happens and who shakes out.

Kawann Short is also very interesting.  Doubt he comes in at more than $4M

Geno Atkins could be a high risk/high reward play.  He might crack $5M.

 

I just don't see how Dean Lowry is a competitive contract in this market.  I wouldn't sign him for 1 year $3M, so therefore we should cut him.

[cannondale]

2 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

The whole "natural passing of the torch" from a declining Rodgers to Love is now gone. Packers have 2 choices: 

1. Invest in 12 for another 3+ years and have Love sit the bench his entire rookie deal (by that point, Love probably requests a trade), but either way, you've wasted that period where Love is at his cheapest.  
2. Commit to Love and prematurely trade a HOF QB still playing at an MVP level. 

If the Packers do the former, the Love pick was a bust. 

If the Packers do the latter, they're cutting their SB window down by a year or two. 

The Packers gambled. They gambled on Rodgers not ever being 2020 Rodgers again, which frankly is weird because everyone expected him to be better in year 2 of MLF's system. Rodgers then exceeded expectations, creating this predicament. The Packers probably should have waited a few more years and then drafted the future QB, but they made that move in 2020. Now they're caught in the middle.  

I can agree that the Packers may have misjudged Rodgers demise. But I don't think this turns into a ****show for the following reasons: Rodgers has been there. He was Love. Rodgers has admitted to the idea that he may not finish his career in Green Bay. Rodgers has said on more than one occasion that he and the Packers have always had great dialogue when it came to his contract and trying to the the best thing for both parties. You know the Packers will try to handle things with class - whatever that may turn out to be. Rodgers will do the same

 

[skibrett15]

Safer to assume that Jordan Love is Ryan Tannehill than Aaron Rodgers.  And Tannehill is an optimistic view of any random 1st round QB.

[packfanfb]

6 minutes ago, cannondale said:

I can agree that the Packers may have misjudged Rodgers demise. But I don't think this turns into a ****show for the following reasons: Rodgers has been there. He was Love. Rodgers has admitted to the idea that he may not finish his career in Green Bay. Rodgers has said on more than one occasion that he and the Packers have always had great dialogue when it came to his contract and trying to the the best thing for both parties. You know the Packers will try to handle things with class - whatever that may turn out to be. Rodgers will do the same

 

I think Rodgers will maintain his outward professionalism about it throughout the entire process. 

[Dubz41]

6 minutes ago, cannondale said:

I can agree that the Packers may have misjudged Rodgers demise. But I don't think this turns into a ****show for the following reasons: Rodgers has been there. He was Love. Rodgers has admitted to the idea that he may not finish his career in Green Bay. Rodgers has said on more than one occasion that he and the Packers have always had great dialogue when it came to his contract and trying to the the best thing for both parties. You know the Packers will try to handle things with class - whatever that may turn out to be. Rodgers will do the same

 

+1

I remember Rodgers (or Rodgers' people) saying he wasn't interested in just redoing the contract. If the Packers wanted to talk contract there would have to be more money involved somehow.

I don't blame him.  Every time he sets the bar for QB$$ it seems to take a week before someone less talented overtakes him.  

As far as Love goes, what a great pick.  I can't come up with one single rookie who would've made such a difference as the acquisition of a young QB to threaten Aaron's way-too-comfortable throne.  All the inspiration needed.