Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 147

Thread: 2018

  1. #61
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Mukwonago, WI
    Posts
    1,378
    Tight End would make a lot of sense. I'd like to spend a 1st round pick on either a tight end or pass rusher, depending again on defensive scheme and what we do with Dom. I'm fairly happy with our receiving core, even if we lose Nelson and/or Cobb. I've got plenty of faith in our younger players and think Allison would be just fine in an increased role. Maybe a later round pick for a WR but the only offense I'm looking at in the first 4 rounds is tight end and I'd consider looking towards the O-line later in the draft above WR.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    1,081
    I just did some experimenting on OTC... i agree, if we stay in a 3-4, a Matthews extension makes total sense, and i'd be fully on board... if we switch to a 4-3, then letting him go would not be a huge loss... I'm all for signing a guy like Melvin and drafting a CB pretty early... we probably will have 4 picks in the first 3 rounds, and I've seen as many as 5 in the next two rounds... I think we have to OLB & CB in those first 2 picks, and we have a little ammo to really target some guys as far as trading up... FA, King, Randall, early draft pick, Rollins becomes a position of strength, health is always the wild card...

  3. #63
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Mukwonago, WI
    Posts
    1,378
    I'd rather bring back Ahmad Brooks than Matthews. If we can't restructure him he's just not very good and not worth $12M. Take away the Tampa game and he's been a non factor (basically 3 years of him being a non factor now).

    Given the production we've seen from Matthews the last few seasons and the fact that he's injury prone, I don't think we can bring him back for more than $5-6M a year. I'd be perfectly content with a rookie starting in his place next year.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    749
    OTC has us at 42 mil in space for 2108. So cutting Matthews or Cobb just to open up money, makes little sense.

    This is all a ballpark prediction so bare with me.

    2018 Cap Hits
    Adams: 8, similar to Cobbs deal, Adams' can be structured to have that lesser cap hit in year 1.
    Linsley: 4, his cap hit for 2018 can also be structured to have it be the lesser 4 in this year 1.
    Burnett: 6, I don't think he deserves a raise or anything. So 6 is his AAV from his last deal. I believe this is an accurate number.

    So for those 3 key FAs, that's around 16. Leaving us 26 mil in space. Maybe Adams is a bit more than 8 in year 1. Maybe Burnett too idk. It's a best guess based on our previous key FA contracts.

    Either way, we will have a decent chunk to play around with. Cutting Clay would open up 11 and Cobb would open up 10. Unless TT wants to go wild, it makes no sense to open up an extra 11 or 10 on top of that 26.

    As some have said, it would be AMAZING if they extended and restructured both. That could clear another 8-10 for 2018, giving us a whopping 34-36 mil in space with our key FAs already inked. AND you keep two seasoned vets who can absolutely still play a role on this team, just one that isn't chained to a massive cap hit.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    749
    Now with the 34-36, you can bring Evans and Brooks back. Why the heck not. Really hope Evans wants to go another year. And Brooks is cheap depth, also maybe wants to rebound from this underwhelming season.

    The high end CB class is pretty dumb. The Rams have tons of space so Trumaine Johnson will get inked easily. Butler is okay i guess. Maybe he gets a 3 year 30 mil deal?? Not sure if he is in the break the bank category. I am uneducated with him tho so don't quote me there.

    I think Bashaud Breeland from the Redskins could be a potential steal FA. We need to start looking at younger players just off their Rookie deals who hit the market, similar to a Hyde or Hayward. Guys that have some experience and are just tapping into their potential.

    As for Melvin, thats another player who is just now tapping into his potential. I mean, the colts probably have a ton of space to lock him up so that kinda sucks. PFF is rating him very very well this year, for what thats worth. He would be a fine addition to our Secondary. But you prob have to overpay for him and out do what the Colts and their 84 mil in space wants to pay for him.

    Not really sure what else is out there for CB. Sucks we missed the boat on AJ Bouye last year. Cause hes a star.

    Also a very small chance Ansah and Lawrence hit FA. I am hoping we somehow land Chubb or Key. Key could drop. Us going 7-9 makes getting Key highly possible. These are potential 7 8 maybe 10 sack players in year 1. I would be ecstatic if we landed one of them.

    And as we all know, firing Dom Capers is step 1 to improving this defense. By doing that alone, you are already making strides forward.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    9,509
    Iím not sure we take key even if heís available. Weíve typically shied away from character concern guys early. Clelin Ferrell is a name Iíve seen a couple times as an intriguing guy that could go near our pick.

    Harold Landry will be another interesting case. Had an incredible junior year and was talked about as a top 10 pick last year. Wasnít as productive this year, but was slowed by an ankle injury. He might be a steal at 15 if he falls.
    Last edited by crewfan13; 12-23-2017 at 09:20 AM.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    793
    Pack need to loose last 2 and with help can get a top 10 pick.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    9,509
    Assuming the strength of schedule calculations are correct on the website tankathon, then 10 or 11 is our best pick. If their strength of schedule is only teams weíve played to date (so it doesnít include the two teams we have to play yet), then 11 is our best case scenario. If the calculation includes teams we have to play yet, then we can get to 10. In every case, but especially the case of getting to 10, we need a bunch of help, like Minnesota losing to Chicago, Oakland bearing the eagles, the jets beating the patriots and a whole bunch more semi likely scenarios.

    As it sits right now, there are 7 teams who already have 10 losses, so theyíll be worse than us no matter what. Then thereís 3 teams at 9 losses. Unfortunately, Denver and Cincinnati will finish with worse strength of schedule, so they will get a better pick than us. So that leaves the jets and us in this case with the same strength of schedule. Like I said earlier, if the strength of schedule calculation doesnít include our last two games, then we canít pass the jets no matter what.

    If they include the last two teams already, then we need something similar to the following to happen. The jets need to beat the chargers and patriots. Oakland needs to beat Philly and lose to the chargers. The lions need to lose to Cincinnati and Minnesota needs to lose to Chicago. Then Washington, Arizona and Miami need to win one of their last two. And we need to lose out. Then I think we get the 10th pick. But I could be wrong. It was about 5 minutes of schedule checking.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    9,509
    Actually, looking at it, I donít think itís possible to get 10 due to likely losing the strength of schedule tiebreaker. Now that I look it, we need both Oakland and the jets to win out. And we need the chargers to win one more game. And the chargers final schedule is jets and Oakland. So itís impossible for that to happen.

    Realistically, our best case sceanrio without calling for ant major upsets is the chargers win one of their last two. Washington wins out (beats Denver and the giants) and Miami wins one more and finishes with a better strength of schedule. In that case, we slide up to 13.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    724
    i have been reading about the excitement about drafting high next year and i have to ask have you guys pay attention to what Ted does in the draft? evidently not! the probability of trading back yes back is significant. i personally question if Ted can fill all the holes in 1 draft? cap wise a possible Rodger's deal would very wise. pay will only go up significantly for QB's. Adams is a must resign. he should hold out for a Demaryius Thomas type deal ($8.5 mil base and $12 mil cap hit). with how finicky Rodgers is about precision routes GB cannot let him walk. there is both risk/reward in bringing back both Cobb and Jordy. both their deals are in the final year in 2018. Rodgers loves them. the risk is in keeping both there is no development for future WR's. Thompson drafts 'em and Mike cuts 'em. all in for 2018? not Ted's style. the best bet is compromise. push more chips in on the D side of things. new coordinator and pray they hit on every pass rush guy they bring in and flip the D to a top 10 unit. of the WR's hitting FA i like Landry. he fits this scheme. i do not see that happening. i think a new voice on the O side would be wise also. not a new O coordinator but a new WR coach or QB coach sure. anyway. those are some of my thoughts.
    Last edited by alabastertubby; 12-23-2017 at 06:01 PM.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    749
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    Iím not sure we take key even if heís available. Weíve typically shied away from character concern guys early. Clelin Ferrell is a name Iíve seen a couple times as an intriguing guy that could go near our pick.

    Harold Landry will be another interesting case. Had an incredible junior year and was talked about as a top 10 pick last year. Wasnít as productive this year, but was slowed by an ankle injury. He might be a steal at 15 if he falls.
    yea i was gonna say Walterfootball finally changed our projected pick to Ferrell. Seems like he is the 3rd pass rusher after Chubb and Key. Cant go wrong with him either.

    Landry is actually going 49th in the walter mock, two picks after us. I doubt he drops that far. But he will 100% be available wherever we pick in the 1st, and I would be thrilled to land him. He is a great fit for 3-4 OLB, if we stay with that.

    As for the character concern thing with Key, i mean, that 100% needs to take a backseat at this point. Especially with Key, those are very mild concerns. Kid is talented as hell. Draft him if you can or regret it in a year.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    793
    The Pack have 11 picks, and if they pick at say 14th, that could turn into some really nice players.
    RD 1 - 14TH
    RD 2 - 14TH
    RD 3 -14TH
    ETC
    PLUS RD 3 - 38TH comp pick

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    749
    Quote Originally Posted by Pcs Papa View Post
    The Pack have 11 picks, and if they pick at say 14th, that could turn into some really nice players.
    RD 1 - 14TH
    RD 2 - 14TH
    RD 3 -14TH
    ETC
    PLUS RD 3 - 38TH comp pick
    ya. we are finally in that range where you can get another nice prospect in the 2nd round. Its a position we can trade up from too. Maybe eye someone who is dropping and swoop in and grab him. Those are the types of moves this front office needs to start making. Have some balls for once.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    793
    Quote Originally Posted by Sdh09e44 View Post
    ya. we are finally in that range where you can get another nice prospect in the 2nd round. Its a position we can trade up from too. Maybe eye someone who is dropping and swoop in and grab him. Those are the types of moves this front office needs to start making. Have some balls for once.
    That's what I'm thinking, move up. Raji and Matthews in the first round seemed to work out, for awhile.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    9,509
    Quote Originally Posted by Sdh09e44 View Post
    yea i was gonna say Walterfootball finally changed our projected pick to Ferrell. Seems like he is the 3rd pass rusher after Chubb and Key. Cant go wrong with him either.

    Landry is actually going 49th in the walter mock, two picks after us. I doubt he drops that far. But he will 100% be available wherever we pick in the 1st, and I would be thrilled to land him. He is a great fit for 3-4 OLB, if we stay with that.

    As for the character concern thing with Key, i mean, that 100% needs to take a backseat at this point. Especially with Key, those are very mild concerns. Kid is talented as hell. Draft him if you can or regret it in a year.
    Rumor has it that the reason key had a leave of absence this year was to enter rehab. So throwing the red flags out the window if heís available is incredibly unwise. You need to dive very deep into his history. Look at randy Gregory. Heís played 14 games in 3 seasons. Josh Gordon went 3 year without playing. Drug concerns are a huge red flag. We donít pick this highly very often. We canít afford to miss on the pick, but we also canít afford to draft a guy who might never be available to play.

    Iím not saying donít draft him, but you better be very sure heís over whatever it is he did if you take him.

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •