Did we pay too much for Perry last year ? Also do we sign Matthews after next year considering he's a FA?

[Deekster37]

Give me your thoughts?

[MacReady]

No.  We knew what we were getting into with Perry.  We should have paid more to invest in his backup.  He's capable of absolutely demolishing the best left tackles in the league.  His only fault is his lack of availability, but you live with that and hope he's available in crunch time in a season, meaning the playoffs.  I'd pay him more money than he's getting paid now even if he sat out every regular season game and was only available for a playoff run. 

As far as Matthews, you absolutely re-sign him after this year.   He's not going to cost some 26-year-old pass rush money.  Matthews had an 83.4 PFF grade this year and had his best season since 2014.  Perry had an 80.5 grade.    He is an extremely valuable commodity as far as a person and a player to this team and every armchair evaluator who says he sucks or can't get penetration or doesn't have it anymore has been too busy watching Von Miller and Joey Bosa and doesn't understand that not every pass rusher is an elite player in their prime.  If Matthews was a free agent this year, even at 31 years old, he would be the most sought after pass rusher in free agency after Demarcus Lawrence.  I'm really sick and tired of the Clay Matthews disrespecting around here because he is still at 31 years old the only playmaker we have in the front seven.  With a new defensive coordinator, you can bet your butt that Pettine is extremely happy to have him. 

[CWood21]

11 hours ago, Deekster37 said:

Give me your thoughts?

In hindsight?  Maybe.  But you'd be hard pressed to find a combination of pass rushers in the FA class last year that the Packers could have signed with the money that was spent on Nick Perry.  Quality pass rushers rarely hit FA, and when they do they tend to get overpaid because of it.  Maybe the Packers did overpay, but the alternative of not signing Perry is significantly worse.

[Norm]

If we let him go, this thread would be titled did we screw up not signing Perry.

I didn't want to give him that contract but I couldn't possibly let him do either. It had to be done.

[Greg C.]

After that first game against Seattle, the Perry contract was looking GREAT. After that, not so much. But I still think it was reasonable to give him that contract. He had been steadily improving and was coming off a really good season. And there's a decent chance that he's got a few more good seasons in him. Too bad he can't stay healthy. 

[Mazrimiv]

I would put Perry in the reasonable risk category.  He wasn't (and isn't) a lock to earn the numbers he signed for, but he plays a premium position where the team has very little depth.  He's also shown himself to be a decent player on those rare occasions when he's healthy.  In my mind, letting him walk would have been a far bigger risk than signing him at the numbers he's at.

[Mazrimiv]

On 2/24/2018 at 3:34 AM, Deekster37 said:

Give me your thoughts?

When you're the one starting the topic, you might want to consider sharing yours as well.

[Deekster37]

Relax gents! I think we overpayed for him and I would of let him walk......yeah we are short handed in that position but your never handcuffed to a player there's always a different route! I think the Perry thing reflects on Thompson's drafting he put himself in that position! Also I love Matthews it would be like losing a brother so I think we should sign him to max 2 year deal let him retire as Packer! Although is that the smartest thing to do?!

[Stevein2012]

Perry was the best edge in FA available to us last year and his cap hit was only 6m anyways so he probably was at least worth that even with his injuries.  He's always going to be boom or bust based on purely health reasons but he's the only guy on our team who can go out there and beat a top OT off the edge and hes very good against the run too.  On Matthews I'd wait and see how he fits in Pettine's defense

[Mazrimiv]

9 minutes ago, Deekster37 said:

Relax gents! I think we overpayed for him and I would of let him walk......yeah we are short handed in that position but your never handcuffed to a player there's always a different route! I think the Perry thing reflects on Thompson's drafting he put himself in that position! Also I love Matthews it would be like losing a brother so I think we should sign him to max 2 year deal let him retire as Packer! Although is that the smartest thing to do?!

That's a lot of exclamation points, but I applaud your enthusiasm for all things Packers.

Even in hindsight, I don't see many different routes the Packers could have taken that had less risk than signing Perry.

[squire12]

1 hour ago, Deekster37 said:

Relax gents! I think we overpayed for him and I would of let him walk......yeah we are short handed in that position but your never handcuffed to a player there's always a different route! I think the Perry thing reflects on Thompson's drafting he put himself in that position! Also I love Matthews it would be like losing a brother so I think we should sign him to max 2 year deal let him retire as Packer! Although is that the smartest thing to do?!

@Deekster37

Can you elaborate on what the Edge group would be if Perry was let go in FA last offseason? 

[Golfman]

No we did not pay Nick Perry too much given the year he had. You don't find guys who can put up double digit sacks and you sure don't let them walk. No we don't sign Matthews to a new contract unless he gets extended this year with reduced cap number for 2018 and 2019. Otherwise, adios! 

[OneTwoSixFive]

With Perry the deal is what it is. I trust Ball to get as good a deal as he can. With Matthews, well obviously it's about how much.

[ricky]

Guys are going to get "overpaid". Which means we don't think they're worth the money they get. After all, they're just playing a game. A game which could cripple them for the rest of their lives, or leave them so brain damaged they can't remember how to walk to the bathroom, but still, a game. So, was Perry worth his contract? Yes. Because that is what he and the team agreed was the proper compensation for his services. Was he great? Sometimes. Was he injured? Sometimes. Was he "worth it"? Asked and answered.

Now, as far as CMIII, definitely, if possible, extend him and reduce his cap hit. But let him go? DC's still have to game plan against him. He is versatile enough to move around the defense, and though his sack numbers have declined, the number of times he's literally a split second late in getting to the QB is amazing. He still has the ability to change a game, and the Packers have too few of those guys to lose one because "he's making too much money." 

[Golfman]

22 minutes ago, ricky said:

Guys are going to get "overpaid". Which means we don't think they're worth the money they get. After all, they're just playing a game. A game which could cripple them for the rest of their lives, or leave them so brain damaged they can't remember how to walk to the bathroom, but still, a game. So, was Perry worth his contract? Yes. Because that is what he and the team agreed was the proper compensation for his services. Was he great? Sometimes. Was he injured? Sometimes. Was he "worth it"? Asked and answered.

Now, as far as CMIII, definitely, if possible, extend him and reduce his cap hit. But let him go? DC's still have to game plan against him. He is versatile enough to move around the defense, and though his sack numbers have declined, the number of times he's literally a split second late in getting to the QB is amazing. He still has the ability to change a game, and the Packers have too few of those guys to lose one because "he's making too much money." 

By the way, Ricky good to see you over here!