craig Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 3 hours ago, Sandy said: To add to this, this also eliminates the pressure to take an early slot corner, in case the draft does not fall the way we want it to. It would be nice to add an early pick to this CB room, but it's hardly a necessity now. Which is what I like about how Gute handles FA. I think the need remains pretty urgent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 2 minutes ago, craig said: I think the need remains pretty urgent. It's still up there. But not a necessity. That means to me like we don't need to trade up to secure a guy in the first round. Rather we can let a player come to us in rounds 2-4 and be just fine. And really, that is where we are at with most every position, except safety right now. We still have a large need there. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWhitehurst Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 1 hour ago, Kampfgeist said: We aren't bringing Allen into GB, that we agree on. In 13 games Heath has 15 catches for 125 yards 8.3ypc and 1 TD (also a couple very poor drops on his limited targets). He hasn't proved anything. Being a tier...or two...above Charles Johnson or Malachi Dupre is still a hurdle one is stepping over, not even a little bunny hop. I do get the reasons for everyone's optimism for Heath, but he should never be the reason we wouldn't look to upgrade that position. (last part isn't directed at you Lodestar) Don't know if the Packers will take a WR this draft, kinda doubt it. But if they did, I'm thinking they might look at a type in the mold of Doubs in case they aren't sure at present if they will be willing and/or able to resign Doubs for the money he'll be asking for when that time comes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 13 Author Share Posted March 13 16 minutes ago, DWhitehurst said: Don't know if the Packers will take a WR this draft, kinda doubt it. But if they did, I'm thinking they might look at a type in the mold of Doubs in case they aren't sure at present if they will be willing and/or able to resign Doubs for the money he'll be asking for when that time comes. The WR the Packers need is Watson. His snap count needs to take a dramatic turn up. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 44 minutes ago, DWhitehurst said: Don't know if the Packers will take a WR this draft, kinda doubt it. But if they did, I'm thinking they might look at a type in the mold of Doubs in case they aren't sure at present if they will be willing and/or able to resign Doubs for the money he'll be asking for when that time comes. If either of the FSU WRs are available at our second round picks, I am taking a good, long look at the rest of the board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NFLGURU Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 36 minutes ago, Leader said: The WR the Packers need is Watson. His snap count needs to take a dramatic turn up. Anybody heard anything about Watson. Last I heard he was going to go to Madison to narrow down the cause of the hamstring problems. Some hi-tech therapy stuff. Havent heard any up dates though. Gotta have that guy, things change when he's in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 1 hour ago, vegas492 said: It's still up there. But not a necessity. That means to me like we don't need to trade up to secure a guy in the first round. Rather we can let a player come to us in rounds 2-4 and be just fine. And really, that is where we are at with most every position, except safety right now. We still have a large need there. Right. We don't have to 1st-round or trade-up for anything or anybody. But if we don't get a CB by pick 91, I'll be pretty bummed and disappointed. Same for safety. And for OL. Having 5 picks in the first 3 rounds is really awesome! I'm sure Gute wishes he had that every year! Plus with others to perhaps move around a little bit, if he needs to in order to get guys he really likes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWhitehurst Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 1 hour ago, Leader said: The WR the Packers need is Watson. His snap count needs to take a dramatic turn up. For sure, provided his hamstring issue doesn't prove chronic. Even if they think it might, I just don't see a WR in this draft that is a replica of what you get in 4.3/40 6'4 Watson when he is healthy. Someone might cite Coleman, who may be better at contested catch, but he runs a 4.61. Perhaps the closest is Brian Thomas, Jr., but given all their other more pressing needs, I just don't see them taking him at #25. (But who knows? I'm never right on my predictions for what Gute does in the 1st round). I'm just gonna guess Gute will gamble on seeing Watson's hamstring issue through for another season, hope for the best. Hence, my guess is if they did at some point in the draft consider a WR, it more likely would be future-proofing relative to Doubs, should they decide not to pay him the big 2nd contract when his current one is up. Again, this is all speculation. I usually eat alot of crow every draft like most other fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 3 hours ago, HighCalebR said: What were the real cuts? Swapping Jacob's for Jones and upgrading Savage to McKinney doesn't feel like starving the team to fix the cap. Ol buddy just wants to be right so bad. If I don't know any better, I think he slept with your wife or something. He's simply pointing out that the Packers haven't had to rely on cap maneuvers like restructures to make ends up meet. Last offseason, the Packers biggest exterior FA signing was LS Matt Orzech who signed a 3 year, $3.7M deal to leave the Rams. The year before that was Pat O'Donnell who signed a 2 year, $4M deal to leave Chicago. That's $7.7M in total money given out to their top FA signings last 2 seasons. Xavier McKinney's cap hit this year is higher than that. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Striker Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 (edited) 4 hours ago, packfanfb said: Sooooo many good slot CB guys in this class though. I hope GB doesn't go the other way "hey we got Nixon so we're going to pass" on Bullard, Jones, T. Smith, etc. Hope they still look to upgrade if the board leans that way. I'd bet Gute would take one of the top slot guys if they fall to him. They took Stokes with a pretty full CB room. Can't have enough good guys in the secondary in general and he's been willing to take swings. Edited March 13 by Striker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kampfgeist Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 (edited) 3 hours ago, Lodestar said: Yeah I'm not saying we shouldn't look to upgrade at WR if a guy falls in our laps. Hell, if this front office saw a guy they liked and took him in round 1 or 2 this year, I would find a way to get very excited about it. What I am saying is that Heath's 13 measly catches as a rookie puts him in a different category than guys like Dupre, Johnson, DeAngelo Yancey, Kevin Dorsey, et al who never caught a single ball for us — AKA the guys Uglem is referring to when he says Packers fans overvalue our fringe WRs (which I think historically is true). Finally, and most importantly, I somehow all this time thought your avatar was Vince McMahon, not Ken Jennings. With you on the 1st part Think you just illustrated Uglem's point in the 2nd part -- he was definitely referring to guys like Heath and DuBose and probably Melton as the fringe WR's that get overvalued by the fanbase. Changed my avatar to Ken Jennings the same day Rodgers declared he wanted to be Jeopardy host. Maybe I need to change it to something involving architecture now or just go with tinfoil? Edited March 13 by Kampfgeist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 22 minutes ago, CWood21 said: If I don't know any better, I think he slept with your wife or something. He's simply pointing out that the Packers haven't had to rely on cap maneuvers like restructures to make ends up meet. Last offseason, the Packers biggest exterior FA signing was LS Matt Orzech who signed a 3 year, $3.7M deal to leave the Rams. The year before that was Pat O'Donnell who signed a 2 year, $4M deal to leave Chicago. That's $7.7M in total money given out to their top FA signings last 2 seasons. Xavier McKinney's cap hit this year is higher than that. Maybe it's just his punch able looking face that leaves me irked. I guess I see no point for the tweet if he's just genuinely enthused Ball knows how the cap works. Like this was obviously the plan the last 5 years. I knew it, you knew it, your hamster knew it. Now that I think about it it's the air of self importance that makes his face looks so punchable. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 2 minutes ago, HighCalebR said: Maybe it's just his punch able looking face that leaves me irked. I guess I see no point for the tweet if he's just genuinely enthused Ball knows how the cap works. Like this was obviously the plan the last 5 years. I knew it, you knew it, your hamster knew it. Now that I think about it it's the air of self importance that makes his face looks so punchable. Unfortunately, I'd say about 98% of this subforum is smarter than most fans. And the few that aren't included in that group know who they are. Like I said in the past, Ingalls tends to be a bit more pessimistic in his viewpoints. Not saying they're wrong, but I'd generally be more conservative than liberal when it comes to cap space. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 14 Author Share Posted March 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 I wonder if the solution to "they don't have stack LBs to line up with 3 of them" is "don't do that." Like it's not like in obvious running situations you can't line up with 5 across the front and 2 stack LBs, a thing they already have the personnel for. 2 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.