CWood21 Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 6 minutes ago, packfanfb said: So you agree... I said the only argument you could take a lesser OLB over a better CB is because you're unlikely to find a quality pass rusher. Personally, I had Watt rated a bit higher than King, but I vividly remember being on the higher end with regards to Watt. There was nothing wrong with taking Kevin King over Watt. IF King hit, we're talking about an elite corner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 Just now, CWood21 said: I said the only argument you could take a lesser OLB over a better CB is because you're unlikely to find a quality pass rusher. Personally, I had Watt rated a bit higher than King, but I vividly remember being on the higher end with regards to Watt. There was nothing wrong with taking Kevin King over Watt. IF King hit, we're talking about an elite corner. I think this is a fallacy. Given what I've read about how close the Packers were at taking Watt at 28 and not hearing the same about King, I see little doubt that Watt was rated higher... If Watt makes it to 33, he's a Packer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 I have no problem with the pick. If King weren't the Nick Perry of CBs, we would be wishing that we had that 5th year option for King instead of the shot with Biegel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 11 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Honestly didnt know much about King because the consensus was he had 3rd round tape but was a workout warrior at the combine and shot up boards. I'm not here trying to **** all over King and I pointed out that the play of Watt and Kings, plus injuries, is hindsight so I didnt go there. At the time the pick was made you prioritize pass rushers given the limited resources available in acquiring them through other means even later in the draft. There were more avenues to get a CB than EDGE. Even if you grade Watt and King together (I would bet Watt was higher and would have been the pick at 33), you lean pass rusher if you need a tie-breaker and getting an extra 4th rd pick as a means of sacrificing the pass rusher is a bad move imo. Now compare that to 2018 where we gave up Davenport to get Alexander but got an extra 1st. Ignoring that Alexander is the better player, pretend he wasn't, it's still a good move. That's a different ball game because of the value of the extra compensation. He was viewed as a Day 2 prospect because he was viewed as a marginal athlete and he was too grabby when he was at Washington. But that doesn't change the fact that he had talent. When he posted that 4.43 forty at the Combine, people were skeptical that was a real number. Going back the last 5 combines, there's been 4 DBs who have posted a 4.45 or lower 40 yard dash and at least 6'3": Akhello Witherspoon, Obi Melifonwu, Kevin King, and Taylor Mays. Only Witherspoon and King were viewed as CB prospects. If you move that marker to 4.5 or less, you have 5 cornerbacks: Holton Hill, Witherspoon, King, Brian Allen, and Sean Smith. You don't find that kind of athlete at cornerback. They're usually playing WR. Just for comparison, over that 10 year period there have been 41 WR prospects who were at least 6'3" and ran a 4.5 forty or less. King is a WR-level athlete playing CB. He was a rare athlete. But back to TJ Watt, there were a TON of posters who believed if his last name was something other than Watt, he'd have been a late Day 2 pick at the earliest. Instead, he was a first round pick based largely off one year of production. And there were even fewer posters who felt that the combination of Biegel/King was less valuable than Watt. King was graded higher. Ted Thompson traded down to pick up another asset, and still got his man. Do you think that he would willingly trade down knowing that Watt was unlikely to fall to him at 33? I don't. The only reason you're putting that last comment in there is because Alexander is playing better than Davenport. The only reason you're arguing this part is because Watt has been better (i.e. healthier) than King. IF they were closer and the Packers got some value out of Biegel, you wouldn't be making this argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 19 minutes ago, packfanfb said: I think this is a fallacy. Given what I've read about how close the Packers were at taking Watt at 28 and not hearing the same about King, I see little doubt that Watt was rated higher... If Watt makes it to 33, he's a Packer. Yet the Packers had the opportunity to take Watt at 28, and they chose not to. They chose to trade down. If Watt was clearly the BPA, why didn't they take him? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted November 25, 2018 Share Posted November 25, 2018 Just now, CWood21 said: Yet the Packers had the opportunity to take Watt at 28, and they chose not to. They chose to trade down. If Watt was clearly the BPA, why didn't they take him? Even if the Packers stayed put, even in light of the rumors they considered taking him, it was not a guarantee they would have taken him. We probably wouldn't have taken King over Watt at 29, but we also could have taken Ryan Ramcyzk, who is better than either King or Watt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted November 25, 2018 Share Posted November 25, 2018 6 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: Even if the Packers stayed put, even in light of the rumors they considered taking him, it was not a guarantee they would have taken him. We probably wouldn't have taken King over Watt at 29, but we also could have taken Ryan Ramcyzk, who is better than either King or Watt. They weren't taking Ramczyk. They were going with a defender. Especially in what was viewed as a mediocre OL class. It was Watt or King. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted November 25, 2018 Share Posted November 25, 2018 7 minutes ago, CWood21 said: They weren't taking Ramczyk. They were going with a defender. Especially in what was viewed as a mediocre OL class. It was Watt or King. All of this attempted revisionist history. We absolutely needed a CB in that draft. I wanted Watt, but it was obvious TT had his sights set on King. It's too early to tell if he was right or wrong. King stays healthy he can play CB. I've seen quite a few of Watt's sacks and not many are where he just cleanly whips his guy and gets to the QB in a hurry. Not sure he isn't a product of the system guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopackgonerd Posted November 25, 2018 Share Posted November 25, 2018 Hopefully Breeland can play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted November 25, 2018 Share Posted November 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, Gopackgonerd said: Hopefully Breeland can play, better than he can tweet. . I fixed it for you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopackgonerd Posted November 25, 2018 Share Posted November 25, 2018 Just now, Golfman said: I fixed it for you! I think that would be a definitive yes. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted November 25, 2018 Share Posted November 25, 2018 20 hours ago, Siman08/OH said: Honestly...how many times has the defense BLOWN it after Rodgers gave them a chance to win? How many times has it happened multiple times in a single game? I betcha it’s half those times. As a Capers hater since 2011, there is certainly something to be said for that. Only posted it as an addition to our overall record against winning teams on the road. We just aren't as good as once thought Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted November 25, 2018 Author Share Posted November 25, 2018 (edited) Andy Herman: GB is going to have some intriguing decisions in the offseason. Potential 2019 cap savings if released: T. Davis - $720k Graham - $4mil Bulaga - $6.75mil Spriggs - $1.13mil K. Murphy - $720k L. Taylor - $4.23mil Perry - $11mil Morrison - $720k Tramon - $4.75mil Crosby - $3.6mil Geronimo Allison another really interesting decision. An original round tender for Allison as a RFA would be $2,035,000.00. That’s a fairly big contract for Allison. By not resigning any free agents (Cobb, Matthews, Ryan, Mo, etc.), not tendering GMo, and releasing Murphy, Perry, and Morrison, plus not moving any of the dead space to 2020 and adjusting salaries, I get GB to about $50mil in cap space with 38 players on the roster. Edited November 25, 2018 by Leader Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted November 25, 2018 Author Share Posted November 25, 2018 Andy Herman: In 2018 the Packers are paying $47 million & about 26% of the teams’ total salary for Cobb, Clay, Perry, Graham, Kendricks, Lewis & Bell. That’s kind of a lot for what amounts to: 73 catches - 848 yards - 4TD - 4 sacks and one of the worst starting offensive lineman in football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted November 26, 2018 Share Posted November 26, 2018 16 hours ago, Leader said: Geronimo Allison another really interesting decision. An original round tender for Allison as a RFA would be $2,035,000.00. That’s a fairly big contract for Allison. That'd make him the 76th highest paid WR. You give him that in a heartbeat, especially given the production he had to start the year before he got injured. Right now, you're moving forward with Adams, MVS, and Allison as your starters, and ESB as your #4. 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.