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

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

15 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

15 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

15 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

15 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

15 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

15 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

15 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

15 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

15 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

15 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

Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers were not selected for the 2025 Hall of Fame game.

dfosterf (4h) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo

Zero2Cool (5h) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha

wpr (6h) : Tomorrow is almost here.

packerfanoutwest (6h) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?

packerfanoutwest (6h) : JW is done......stick a fork in him

Zero2Cool (8h) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.

packerfanoutwest (18h) : don't care

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?

packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat

wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.

wpr (22-Apr) : now 3

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?

beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?

Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

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