Mazrimiv Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 42 minutes ago, packfanfb said: The Packers could have cut Josh Jackson (who is so bad he wasn't even active down the stretch last year) and Oren Burks (who's basically worthless) and saved just over $2.2m. In other words, the Packers basically could have bought a proven DB like Justin Coleman or Desmond King (who can also return punts) for the price of simply dropping 2 players who are dead weight on the roster. Smh. If you cut Jacson and Burks, what is the salary of the next two players who are in the top 51 salaries? Would you not need to reduce your calculated cap savings by the amount of those two salaries? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 14 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: How does cutting P-Smith help GB get Kyle Fuller in a 1YR/9.5M deal? Didn't GB already recover most of P-Smith's 2021 cap number with the restructure? I thought his cap hit if we cut him was 8M. After the restructure it's 8.75M. Herman was talking about 2022 savings moreso with Smith. I'm fine with how we handled Preston to keep him around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 2 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Well one of the players taking a spot is the guy you just signed with their money. And that guy is a much better player. I don't know why Jackson and Burks are still on the team....REGARDLESS of whether we add anyone else. Those 2 are dead sticks. It's still 660k plus whatever money you can scrounge up. So you're getting a shade over $1.54M if my math is correct. The only corners signed for less than that was Tremon Smith with Houston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: Because the amount of savings is minimal at best. You don't cut camp bodies for minimal savings. There's a reason why you usually see rookie contracts being finished unless they're squeezed out because of cap numbers or other off-the-field issues. I would agree if you felt there was still some upside reason to hold onto the player. Jackson and Burks don't fit that description. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 12 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: If GB already recovered 7.25M of the potential 8M for P-Smith on the 2021 cap, I am not sure how Herman ever had an interesting point. GB already had the money from P-Smith. It did not get them Kyle Fuller. Correct. That Preston Smith money from restructuring got GB cap compliant. There was not extra for a 1 year $9M contract. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 3 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Except the fact that the Packers aren't keeping Gary off the field. He was on the field for nearly double the amount of snaps as his rookie year. Your top 2 EDGE play ~60% of the defensive snaps, and EDGE3 play ~40% of the defensive snaps unless you have a player (i.e. prime Von Miller) playing 90%+ of the defensive snaps. Preston Smith played nearly 80% of the snaps, and Za'Darius Smith played nearly 85% of the defensive snaps which means a chunk of those snaps are coming from Z lined up on the DL. I'd imagine we'll see an uptick in Gary's snaps this year and play ~60% of the snaps, while Preston Smith will see a decrease in snaps. But you're getting back to the point at hand, do you not see a drastic drop off from Preston Smith to Jonathan Garvin or Randy Ramsey? Those two didn't play because they weren't very good. You hope they make a Y2 jump, but expecting them to come in and not be liabilities is a huge jump IMO. I realize there are a lot of snaps to be accounted for. But if you roll with Jackson and Sullivan, does edge really matter ? Hell I imagine Garvin can run 3 steps behind a TE just as well as Smith. (Yes I know we are gonna run a different system now, I couldn't resist) All that being said, I would be content with King / Newsome or Surtain - but Gute is cutting things a bit close Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 2 minutes ago, packfanfb said: I would agree if you felt there was still some upside reason to hold onto the player. Jackson and Burks don't fit that description. You literally could go down the list of EVERY franchise, and you'll find guys who create some (<$1M) cap savings, but teams don't release them, why? It's not because they're attached to them. It's because the savings are minimal at best. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 1 minute ago, cannondale said: I realize there are a lot of snaps to be accounted for. But if you roll with Jackson and Sullivan, does edge really matter ? Hell I imagine Garvin can run 3 steps behind a TE just as well as Smith. (Yes I know we are gonna run a different system now, I couldn't resist) All that being said, I would be content with King / Newsome or Surtain - but Gute is cutting things a bit close Depends on your philosophy. IF you believe that your EDGE have a bigger impact than your CBs do, no. I tend to believe that EDGE have a bigger impact than CBs do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 17 minutes ago, packfanfb said: But why are Jackson and Burks on the roster, being paid $2m and $1m respectively... That's what's dumb, especially in a year where we are literally restructuring roster bonuses to save a measly $500k on the cap. First off there's a thing called ST, and Burks is great there. Second, what should all our depth be UDFAs? Jackson started a couple games and we survived. That's worth 2 mil. I don't understand how you think rosters should be built? A starting lineup of all pros with minimum salary UDFAs as backups?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: Depends on your philosophy. IF you believe that your EDGE have a bigger impact than your CBs do, no. I tend to believe that EDGE have a bigger impact than CBs do. I think they go hand in hand. But if your CB's stink you better have Lawrence Taylor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 12 minutes ago, cannondale said: I think they go hand in hand. But if your CB's stink you better have Lawrence Taylor. Wouldn't that logic apply the other way as well? If you're EDGE stink, don't you need Darrelle Revis at CB? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 9 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: First off there's a thing called ST, and Burks is great there. Second, what should all our depth be UDFAs? Jackson started a couple games and we survived. That's worth 2 mil. I don't understand how you think rosters should be built? A starting lineup of all pros with minimum salary UDFAs as backups?? Jackson was apparently so bad the team didn't even activate him down the stretch, including the playoffs. In fact, they signed a nearly 40-year old Tramon Williams to take his place on the roster. You and I disagree mainly because you still see some utility in Jackson, perhaps as a backup. I don't, and the Packers seemingly felt that way down the stretch last year. I don't want a bunch of UDFAs at CB, but is Jackson even at that level right now when he can't make the gameday roster? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 Just now, packfanfb said: Jackson was apparently so bad the team didn't even activate him down the stretch, including the playoffs. In fact, they signed a nearly 40-year old Tramon Williams to take his place on the roster. Except that was Green Bay CLEARLY exploiting the practice squad rules... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 (edited) 20 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Wouldn't that logic apply the other way as well? If you're EDGE stink, don't you need Darrelle Revis at CB? Absolutely. I wouldn't say Smith / Gary without Preston would stink. But I would say Jaire with Jackson and Sullivan would stink. I'd add that Clark with Lowry and whoever stink too. So I guess that was my point. That's a lot of stink just to keep Preston. One of my first thoughts at the beginning of FA was that if Preston had to be cut to bolster other spots - I could live with cutting it close at Edge. It ain't over yet, but I'm starting to wonder if that would have been the right move. And I was never expecting the caliber of Fuller. I was expecting a placeholder or two Edited March 21, 2021 by cannondale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted March 21, 2021 Share Posted March 21, 2021 Was Jackson THAT bad last season? Or even for his career? I honestly don't know. Did you know that he has started 15 games? I didn't know that. IMO, he is more unremarkable than bad. I don't have memories of burnt toast Josh Jackson, like I do with Micah Hyde or Ladarius Gunter. I also don't have any memories of an outstanding play from Jackson either. He is just kind of there. Or perhaps I have just blocked it from my memory? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.