Jim Leonhard

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
IMO this is a great idea. Leonhard will be 32 in October but would sign for vet minimum. He's got a vast amount of NFL experience - and experience in the 3-4 although I don't think that matters as much at safety as it does at other positions. The only reason I can see for not to do this is because they signed a different UFA safety they liked better.

Right now the safeties on the team are Burnett, MD Jennings, Sean Richardson, Chris Banjo, and perhaps Micah Hyde if they are planning on moving him to safety. We've seen enough of Jennings, I hope they have too. I'd like to see a first, second or third round pick at safety if it makes sense at the time of the pick and Richardson has a chance to be a good safety. But what an inexpensive insurance policy Leonhard would provide. Leonhard's age is outside of Thompson's MO, but the cost would more than fit his UFA MO. And it would be a no risk signing: If Richardson and a rookie emerge at safety and/or Hyde and another player look to be the answer, they could waive Leonhard and it'd cost them nothing.

A cheap, experienced vet who will sign at vet minimum at a position of need who wants to be a Packer - c'mon Thompson, no reason not to do this (unless you sign a different UFA safety).
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
ivo610

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
IMO this is a great idea. Leonhard will be 32 in October but would sign for vet minimum. He's got a vast amount of NFL experience - and experience in the 3-4 although I don't think that matters as much as safety as it does at other positions. The only reason I can see for not to do this is because they signed a different UFA safety they liked better.

Right now the safeties on the team are Burnett, MD Jennings, Sean Richardson, Chris Banjo, and perhaps Micah Hyde if they are planning on moving him to safety. We've seen enough of Jennings, I hope they have too. I'd like to see a first, second or third round pick at safety if it makes sense at the time of the pick and Richardson has a chance to be a good safety. But what an inexpensive insurance policy Leonhard would provide. Leonhard's age is outside of Thompson's MO, but the cost would more than fit his UFA MO.
Would be similar to the Saturday signing I think
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Money-wise it would be cheaper. Saturday reportedly received a 2-year $7.75M contract including $4M the first year. I'm not sure what the minimum would be for Leonhard, but I believe it would be a little less than $1M/year.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
He's lost a step and a half. Sadly.
Terrible injuries to the knees will do that.

Let Collins play if he wants to play.

I agree with you that Leonhard won´t be the answer at safety. Collins won´t play in the league anymore and no team will and should clear him to.
 

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,111
Reaction score
1,589
Location
Land 'O Lakes
As with anybody, I'd be fine with Green Bay bringing him in for a workout and checking out his knees. I'm not sure that him being a veteran implies that he can magically coach/fix/mentor away our problems in the secondary, especially when he's never played in Capers' defense. If he can play and his knees still have some life, he might be worth the veteran $1m minimum.

What caught my attention most in the article was this commentary about Thompson:
Furthermore, signing free agents to league-minimum deals has a minimal impact on the following year's compensatory draft picks, especially given the number of Packers likely to depart in free agency, so Ted Thompson probably would not have to worry about losing extra picks in 2015 by signing Leonhard.
I'm not trying to shift the focus of the thread, but it seems to imply that a factor in Thompson's decisions to sign free agents is whether it will cost him a potential compensatory pick. I really hope that it's a small factor. Despite the positive spin put on by Packers.com writer Mike Spofford (see link below), our compensatory picks haven't really had much impact during Thompson's era:
http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...-Packers/40fe0c8f-8c73-4876-9fb1-a3a1df77e6ae
... It’s not particularly exciting news or entirely understood, but it’s worth noting the players the Packers have acquired over the years with these extra choices.

On the current team, two-fifths of the starting offensive line in right guard Josh Sitton
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
(fourth round, 2008) and left tackle Marshall Newhouse (fifth round, 2010) were selected with compensatory picks...
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Despite the positive spin put on by Packers.com writer Mike Spofford (see link below), our compensatory picks haven't really had much impact during Thompson's era:

Well, Sitton and Daniels have turned out to be pretty good players.
 

Carl

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 6, 2013
Messages
3,073
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, Wisconsin
As with anybody, I'd be fine with Green Bay bringing him in for a workout and checking out his knees. I'm not sure that him being a veteran implies that he can magically coach/fix/mentor away our problems in the secondary, especially when he's never played in Capers' defense. If he can play and his knees still have some life, he might be worth the veteran $1m minimum.

What caught my attention most in the article was this commentary about Thompson:
I'm not trying to shift the focus of the thread, but it seems to imply that a factor in Thompson's decisions to sign free agents is whether it will cost him a potential compensatory pick. I really hope that it's a small factor. Despite the positive spin put on by Packers.com writer Mike Spofford (see link below), our compensatory picks haven't really had much impact during Thompson's era:
http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...-Packers/40fe0c8f-8c73-4876-9fb1-a3a1df77e6ae

I'd take Daniels and Sitton over the majority of free agents. Plus, not hitting on a draft pick tends to be much cheaper than not hitting on a free agent.

Anyway, Leonhard for cheap seems like a good idea.
 

Alex

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
604
Reaction score
67
Location
Eden Prairie, MN
Jim Leonhard is 32?? Wow. It's a shame what injuries has done to him. Wouldn't hurt to see what he has left in the tank. I can't imagine he'd be much worse than what has been back there for us lately.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Leonhard will be 32 in October and of course they shouldn't sign him if he can't pass the physical or it's obvious he's lost so much speed he can no longer be effective. But I disagree about the value of his experience. Leonhard was a very savvy player in college and IMO it's likely he'd pick up Dom's D very quickly. Not that he'd fix all the problems in the secondary, but I think he'd be a very valuable insurance policy if he's OK physically.

I too hope future comp picks play a very small, or no part in deciding about signing UFAs. As to their value, the earliest is like the first pick in the fourth round before comp picks were awarded so they're value is like other mid- to late-round picks, except they can't be traded.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Having watched a fair amount of Bills football this past season I can say with some assurances that Jim Leonard is not somebody to get excited about. He was probably the weakest link in that defense when he played; not the least impactful.

I have a hard time worrying about who may or may not be the 3rd. safety.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
522
Location
Madison, WI
I'm not trying to shift the focus of the thread, but it seems to imply that a factor in Thompson's decisions to sign free agents is whether it will cost him a potential compensatory pick. I really hope that it's a small factor. Despite the positive spin put on by Packers.com writer Mike Spofford (see link below), our compensatory picks haven't really had much impact during Thompson's era:

I'd have to do some detailed analysis, but I suspect you're being short sighted. Yes, his comp picks haven't always panned out.

I am curious if TT is more willing to trade up when he has a comp pick to help cover his bases. Nothing happens in a vacuum and all that jazz.
 

Oshkoshpackfan

YUT !!!
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
3,286
Reaction score
260
Location
Camp Lejeune NC
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LeonJi23.htm

Ummm.... NO. He has not played a full season since 2009. Injury bug? Maybe, but that is the last thing we need. Not to mention that he has no standout stats whatsoever. No thanks, save the little bit of cash he would cost and put that somewhere it could be more usefull. Also, he is a 5'8" DB..... we would have yet another undersized DB that QB's would pick on all day long.
 

Staff online

Members online

Latest posts

Top