Jump to content
Leader

Random Packer News & Notes

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Beast said:

 

 

I don't mind paying Aaron Jones... but if PFT's Mike Florio's information and numbers are correct (I'm not sure they are, but if they are), then franchise tagging a RB 3 straight times, might be cheaper than the going rate of a very good starting RB.... and while it'll surely piss off the RB, it gives the team more freedom (other than can't use the tag elsewhere, ie not on LT Bak or WR Adams... but it probably wouldn't make sense to use the tag on them as their positions have always been highly paid.

Where according to Florio's information, the franchise tag based on the new CBA takes in the last five high paid players at the position, for the past 5 year's averages of the cap and applies it to the current years cap... which RBs have not been paid that well in the last 5 years, and next year's cap is going down... which would make the RB franchise tag more affordable than franchise tags for most positions.

So while Aaron Jones seems like an amazing person, and I don't prefer to play hard ball with an amazing person... if it's clearly more affordable that way... then sometimes you got to do what you got to do. Though I think they'll get agreements done with Jones and Bak.... the question is at what price and how that'll limit their other options.

Could be some great one year prove it deals next year with teams not having as much cap space, for those with cap space... sadly Packers will be among the least.

It's just not a position worth investing in and the logic behind that has been demonstrated ad nausem. I agree I love having Jones on the team but investing that money elsewhere on the roster is still the smart move. Jones plays great, but he isn't a special talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, spilltray said:

It's just not a position worth investing in and the logic behind that has been demonstrated ad nausem. I agree I love having Jones on the team but investing that money elsewhere on the roster is still the smart move. Jones plays great, but he isn't a special talent.

I've like you to tell the people that were complaining we had no running game before he came along that he isn't a special talent...

I'm not saying we should spend crazy at RB... but according to LaFleur, his job is taking pressure off the QB to make it more efficient when they do all the QBs number... what he doesn't say is the main way to take pressure off a QB is to put the pressure directly on the RB... and Jones has handled that additional pressure with great results, and he's stayed healthy when MM hasn't asked him to be in pass blocking a ton... and Packers want multiple good RBs. Hard to get that unless you draft a ton or at least pay one.

And we need draft picks to improve at OT, DT and CB... so... seems like the Packers are trying to pay one, no matter what we say what position is worth inviting in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, spilltray said:

It's just not a position worth investing in and the logic behind that has been demonstrated ad nausem. I agree I love having Jones on the team but investing that money elsewhere on the roster is still the smart move. Jones plays great, but he isn't a special talent.

I don't know if he's special, but he's damn good and getting better at his craft.  He's too good and too important to let walk in my opinion, and there is enough cap flexibility to figure out a way to make a new deal work out.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

I don't know if he's special, but he's damn good and getting better at his craft.  He's too good and too important to let walk in my opinion, and there is enough cap flexibility to figure out a way to make a new deal work out.  

If all Jones could do is run really, really well, it’d be a no-brainer to let him walk.  The fact that he’s also a very good receiver and can block decently makes it a harder decision for Gute I assume.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spilltray said:

It's just not a position worth investing in and the logic behind that has been demonstrated ad nausem. I agree I love having Jones on the team but investing that money elsewhere on the roster is still the smart move. Jones plays great, but he isn't a special talent.

Hmm, whom to believe... because some say he is special.

https://www.packers.com/video/rodgers-on-rb-jones-33-is-a-special-player

Rodgers on RB Jones: '33 is a special player'

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Beast said:

 

 

I don't mind paying Aaron Jones... but if PFT's Mike Florio's information and numbers are correct (I'm not sure they are, but if they are), then franchise tagging a RB 3 straight times, might be cheaper than the going rate of a very good starting RB.... and while it'll surely piss off the RB, it gives the team more freedom (other than can't use the tag elsewhere, ie not on LT Bak or WR Adams... but it probably wouldn't make sense to use the tag on them as their positions have always been highly paid.

Where according to Florio's information, the franchise tag based on the new CBA takes in the last five high paid players at the position, for the past 5 year's averages of the cap and applies it to the current years cap... which RBs have not been paid that well in the last 5 years, and next year's cap is going down... which would make the RB franchise tag more affordable than franchise tags for most positions.

So while Aaron Jones seems like an amazing person, and I don't prefer to play hard ball with an amazing person... if it's clearly more affordable that way... then sometimes you got to do what you got to do. Though I think they'll get agreements done with Jones and Bak.... the question is at what price and how that'll limit their other options.

Could be some great one year prove it deals next year with teams not having as much cap space, for those with cap space... sadly Packers will be among the least.

As far as whether or not tagging a RB is cheaper, the answer is mixed. If you look at how these new deals are structured, they aren’t really that taxing:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/minnesota-vikings/dalvin-cook-21782/

Cook essentially has a 2 year deal, cap hits of 5 and 14M, 6.2 M in dead cap in 2023.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-orleans-saints/alvin-kamara-21809/

Kamara has essentially the same deal, with 1 year of mega fluff that is a complete joke.

 

Tagging 2 years would run around 11M and 13M, so you end up in the similar spots overall (24M in dead cap, with all of it hitting 2021/2022).


I’d like Jones to get a deal, since he deserves it. If it was structured similar to Cook and Kamara, I could swallow it. He’s partially a WR, so it makes it more justifiable... Cap hits of 10 a year the next 2 with a 5m left in dead money is fine.

 

Edited by pacman5252

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

As far as whether or not tagging a RB is cheaper, the answer is mixed. If you look at how these new deals are structured, they aren’t really that taxing:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/minnesota-vikings/dalvin-cook-21782/

Cook essentially has a 2 year deal, cap hits of 5 and 14M, 6.2 M in dead cap in 2023.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-orleans-saints/alvin-kamara-21809/

Kamara has essentially the same deal, with 1 year of mega fluff that is a complete joke.

 

Tagging 2 years would run around 11M and 13M, so you end up in the similar spots overall (24M in dead cap, with all of it hitting 2021/2022).


I’d like Jones to get a deal, since he deserves it. If it was structured similar to Cook and Kamara, I could swallow it. He’s partially a WR, so it makes it more justifiable... Cap hits of 10 a year the next 2 with a 5m left in dead money is fine.

 

Florio claimed this, "If the cap is flat next year, the running back franchise tag is expected to be in the range of $9.4 million. If the cap drops to the minimum of $175 million, it would be $8.3 million."

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/09/11/vikings-dalvin-cook-still-working-toward-a-contract/

Again, I haven't done the research, but if Florio is correct, and it's 9.4 or less, then the second year would be 11.3 or less and a third year would be 13.55 or less. 

Which would be 3 years for 34.25 or less, averaging less than. 11.5 million per year.

Which over the same timeframe, Cook has 38.325 guaranteed, I believe even for career ending injury next week, which is over $12.75 million per year.

Again, this is assuming Florio numbers are correct, where you seem to be suggesting his number is wrong...

 

Of course, you suggest Florio number's is wrong, as you have it at starting at $11 million....

I think Florio might of been looking at transition tags prices instead of franchise tag prices... and your numbers are correct and he's aren't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, those are the FT number. However, I doubt we are tagging AJ 3 times, it-s a pretty good way to piss off a player and their teammates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, VonKarman said:

No, those are the FT number. However, I doubt we are tagging AJ 3 times, it-s a pretty good way to piss off a player and their teammates.

Well if those numbers are correct, then I'm surprised that some team isn't going to the tag route, to pay a RB less, even if only for one year, as it's a lot cheaper than these current long term deals, especially when RBs have recently failed to live up to their big deals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spilltray said:

C'mon, don't tell me you actually think that means anything.

I just found it ironic and interesting that someone made a claim and not long after, the starting QB comes out and say the exact opposite using the same words (he's watching and listening lol jk)

No I don't put too much stock into a teammates patting each other on the backs, but I also don't put much stock into what the opinion internet says.... which suggest teams shouldn't be signing RBs to there deals, and yet so many teams are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Don't pay Running Backs

Again, depends on how much.  Don't have a dog in this fight ... Jones has looked darn good out of the backfield.  Not sure how many rbs can bust one up the middle for 75 yds and a td and catch balls out of the backfield?  All I know is it's been damn fun to watch.      

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spilltray said:

C'mon, don't tell me you actually think that means anything.

Well, you saying he's not a special talent means a lot less than what Rodgers said.... You could call Rodger's comment teammate fluff, but Rodgers doesn't do that.

I agree with your logic about the RB position. Jones could be an outlier to that logic... I don't know if he's "special" or not. What I do know is he's an excellent multifaceted 3-down RB and an excellent fit in this offense... I have no problem paying him with a reasonable contract extension ($11M a yearish).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

Again, depends on how much.  Don't have a dog in this fight ... Jones has looked darn good out of the backfield.  Not sure how many rbs can bust one up the middle for 75 yds and a td and catch balls out of the backfield?  All I know is it's been damn fun to watch.      

Come on, the 75 yarder wasn't a great play by Jones. The Lions were in a light box and Bakhtiari and Jenkins hit the combo block perfectly. 

Share this post


Link to post
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...