Rate packers performance in free agency so far.· Page 2

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

14 years ago

We need a solid LOLB and no reason why we couldnt of looked at porter.

"Dulak" wrote:

Did you see the contract he got? 18 million for 3 years, for a 32 year old OLB who lost his starting job in Miami? No, thank you.

Anyone looking to get Porter in the early stages was going to over-pay because that is the nature of free agency in the first couple of weeks.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

14 years ago

#12

As for our performance so far in free agency, I'd agree with rockmolder and give a B- based on what has happened thus far.

Signing cliffy and Taush were huge, because that allows us to have a multiplicity of options when pick 23 comes up. We need a OT to groom to take over for Cliffy, sure, but we are not desperate for a starting-caliber LT when our pick comes up.

Considering the talent out there at our positions of need (Safety, and OLB primarily) I can't fault this team too much for staying out. Besides Dansby, there was no one else really top tier worth going after.

It was an okay Free Agency class - a couple of young guys with some potential amidst many vets. Not hugely disappointed with the decision to stay out.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

British
Registered

14 years ago

#13

I give them a B

ya sure they signed our guys for a huge amount of dough - ya guess thats good.

But everyone knows that our LOLB position is weak - why else would matthews get dbl teamed in the playoff game; cuz arizona knew that brad wasnt that good compared to matthews.

We need a solid LOLB and no reason why we couldnt of looked at porter.

Still glad we signed up collins and pickett thou ...

"Dulak" wrote:

If we had signed 32-year-old Porter for $18m over 3 years that would have dropped our free agency 'grade' into the fail category.

As former Packer cap man Andrew Brandt says often the best deals are the ones you don't make.

And for that reason the Packers did well this year.

Lynn_Dickey
Registered

14 years ago

#14

Teddy's a "C" student when it comes to free agency. Does just enough to get by. And that's all he's done this year. Stays with what he knows and does not take any major risks.

Teddy is an "A" student when it comes to the draft.

If you expect anything more than a "C" performance from Ted Thompson in free agency you have been watching the past few years.

He takes low price long shot gambles for anyone not currently in the organization. It's a crap shoot. You get a Chillar or Manual.

"civic" wrote:

please give specific examples of the C grade. When I look at Woodson and Pickett, and then I consider he never over paid for anyone, I give him an A. I am considering how Dallas overpaid for our guard (cannot remember hi name) and hoe Panthers overpaid for Wahle. I lived in Charlotte when Wahle was down there and people were talking how they couldn't bleive when we let him go. Then when they tried to make him an LT they all saw it. Then they realized they way OVERPAID for a RG. It hurt there team!

blank

dfosterf
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#15

It is a "C".

The Pack has done precisely what they had to do, and they had to overpay to do it, just as I predicted, especially with our tackles.

That isn't the Packers fault, it is the fault (imo) of other owners trying to buy legitimacy by over-spending for free agents, over-paying existing players, etc.

The market is the market. I just hope Cliffy is somewhere close to what has been said regarding his health. I am not optimistic on that one, but my personal grade is subject to major revision if Cliffy is better than I predict he will be, coupled with what happens in the draft.

It is also a "C" "at best" if Ted and co. go "BPA" in that draft, dependent on the "level" of BPA. BPA is a lovely concept, but no one has ever explained to my satisfaction on how you can go BPA in the draft and largely ignore free agency at the same time. The very best GM's do not bat much over .333 in the draft, BPA or no. Notice I am NOT advocating REACHING for a need player, I am advocating knowing WHEN to pick from the "tier" of available players, which is what a good FO should be able to discern via the "horizontal" aspect of their board.

So, with that additional proviso, I will change this free agency grade DOWNWARD if they do not address needs in said draft or some move or moves in the remainder of free agency on a case-by-case basis...

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#16

When rebuilding a team, you go BPA. It's common sense. You may have to go BPA for several years as rebuilding rarely happens overnight (historically, it has happened overnight, but it's rare).

We are well past the rebuilding stage. Now, you do a hybrid BPA system. You get BPA of what we need. For example, if the BPAs are a WR and an OT, but the WR is a 7.0 and the OT is a 6.7, you get the OT. You only get the WR if it's the next Randy Moss but without the stupidity.

As for FA, I can't grade yet. If I had a gun to my head, it would be a B, but I'd really rather not grade yet. Yes, we had to keep our OTs, but we damn better well draft some OTs as odds are we won't get 19 games out of either Cliffy or Mark. Knock on wood, not trying to jinx us. I'm just sayin'.

I don't know s*** about college, but I'm hearing from the "experts" that this is a deep draft. If they're right, let's exploit it. Thus is why I'd say more than a C if I had to grade just now. Let's pay our own players.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

DakotaT
Select Member

14 years ago

#17

If we trade back out of the first and end up with 2 2nds and 2 thirds, we should be able to plug our holes with a starting safety (with a high IQ), a starting left guard, a left tackle project (underclassmen with high potential), and another OLB project player. I like the Jones kid and would like to see what he can do with another training camp under his belt.

Now, if Iupati is sitting there at 23, you snag his ass and don't look back. I have a feeling the Cowboys are going to be trading up to get this kid. I am not on board with the thinking that we need to take one of the second tier offensive tackles in the first round just to have him. There's no Michael Oher presents this year.

dfosterf
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#18

"DakotaT" wrote:

First off, I gave you your plus one, so quit your bitchin' :tongue3:

What 2nd tier OT? Okung, Campbell, Davis, Bulaga, Williams or Brown?

None of those are a reach at 23, although Davis makes me nervous, but I am far from in the majority on that.

If you are talking Selvish Capers, Jared Veldheer, Jason Fox, or Roger Saffold--Then I agree with you.

...But THEN we have to have the OLB, CB, and safety discussion ALSO.

Duke Robinson was the consensus best guard in this country at this time last year. He was projected as a first or a 2nd, dependent upon who you asked. He went to Carolina one pick AFTER our Jamon Meredith pick. (great fit, btw--Carolina) Now he's a big fella, and I personally wanted him in the hopes we might be gravitating away from the ZBS, but the fact is that guards are one hell of a lot easier to get than left tackles...Christ, I have a list of 90 "semi-projected" tackles, and most of THEM will probably wind up competing for guard spots.

We probably have a guard for the future. We just don't know who the hell it is, lol

Tackle OR guard, I submit you have your BEST SHOT at getting a REAL CONTRIBUTOR by going o-line in the first round, compared to just about any other option, and the numbers tend (actually, far better than "tend", but I don't wanna go overboard) to prove it. Invest a moment of your time to look this post over from the head honcho over at draftek.

The big uglies

He calls olinemen and d linemen "The big uglies".

It is very enlightening, imo.

DakotaT
Select Member

14 years ago

#19

Tackle OR guard, I submit you have your BEST SHOT at getting a REAL CONTRIBUTOR by going o-line in the first round, compared to just about any other option, and the numbers tend (actually, far better than "tend", but I don't wanna go overboard) to prove it. Invest a moment of your time to look this post over from the head honcho over at draftek.

"dfosterf" wrote:

I agree with this at guard not tackle. Tackle you have to be in the top ten, and unfortunately the two years we were there we were left with Hawk and Raji because the good ones were already gone or didn't exist.

BTW here are some clips for you to use when you torture us with your "marine ways".

http://www.soundboard.com/sb/Sounds_HeartBreak_Ridge.aspx

I'd like to spend all afternoon fighting with you guys but I have to take my spoiled blonde girls bowling.

civic
Member

14 years ago

#20

"please give specific examples of the C grade. When I look at Woodson and Pickett, and then I consider he never over paid for anyone, I give him an A."
That's my point. Ted was bargain shopping for both of these guys. He didn't know they would come close to panning out.

If I remember correctly Pickett was considered another Ram" 1st round bust and there weren't a lot of teams lining up for his services. Woodson was considered an aging CB with a history of injuries and a possible attitude problem. Neither guy was a first day signing or terribly heavily recruited.

They were bargain bin finds just like Manual and Dwyer were. Ted Thompson simply won't go out and sign a star player that would cost a lot of money. He won't risk anthing substancial no matter how big the pay off.

blank

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Martha Careful (20h) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me

Martha Careful (20h) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not

Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!

beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋

Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.

dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.

beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.

beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?

beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you

wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.

wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.

wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious

beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere

beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.

beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.

beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...

beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered

wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.

wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.

wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet

beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury

beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State

beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22