Packers Plan To Be Big Spenders

[HardRightEdge]

You're so used to TT's draft and develop system that you don't realize free agency and trades are a way to bring in talent as well.

While it's true only one of the Chiefs draft picks started during the 2013 season, Dorsey signed or traded for 13 veterans that previously played for other teams, who combined for 114 starts. How many did TT get once again???

Sean Smith, the guy you called a marginal player, started 15 out of 16 games at CB (the only exception being the regular season finale when the Chiefs rested their starters), not playing only 42 snaps during that span.

In the playoff game the Chiefs started eight guys that were signed or traded for by Dorsey in the offseason, three of them on defense.

Get your facts straight before you declare yourself a winner.

Just out of curiosity, who was the third starter out of our 2013 rookie class aside of Bakhtiari and Lacy???

I was going to get into this, but "why bother when there's no listening" put me off doing all the work. Thanks for doing the heavy lifting on the subject.

Beside the 8 playoff starters you mentioned, the new guys in KC also included their nickel back (who led the team in INTs with 4 and also served as the kick returner), the #2 RB, and a couple of backup O-Line guys who got some starts due to injuries.

KC's 2012 bottom-of-the-league record provided first crack at guys hitting the waiver wire in 2013. Dorsey took advantage by signing at least 7 waiver guys.

Clearly, other than the QB and the OT (and maybe the TE who spent the year on IR), we're not talking about core, impact players here. On the other hand, the idea you can accumulate a handful of franchise players on each side of the ball and fill around them with slugs is nonsense. Dorsey vastly upgraded the supporting cast and depth, and that showed in the +9 in the win column.

As some critics say, I agree that this is likely not a pure 11 win team...the only team they beat that finished the year over 0.500 was Philly, and that was when they were struggling early with Vick at QB. Nonetheless, that's one more win over a "quality" opponent than we saw with the Packers. And no matter how you slice it, +9 in the win column is a major accomplishment.

Ironically, Dorsey's worst move may have been signing Bowe, an incumbent, to a franchise player deal...just as everbody is complaining about Burnett's deal like it's Bowe-lite.

 

[rodell330]

I dont buy it...not one bit. Now if Raji,Jolly and Kuhn qualify as "free agents" then yes...because i can see TT bringing back all 3 and then drafting the"ouside help". As far as bringing in a guy who will cost some $$$?? Haha yea right.

 

[AmishMafia]

I just woke up from a dream nightmare that I was a Kansas City Chiefs fan and was posting on one of their fan boards. Whew, scary! … Seriously, can we all agree there is more than one way to build a championship team? IMO the evidence shows the advantage of Thompson’s way is to control the cap while staying in contention for several seasons consecutively. But that does not mean it’s the only way to have success; that a GM with a different MO can’t have success.

Back to the title of the thread: I am seeing the premise of it gain a wider acceptance in the press than I initially expected. It’s one thing for Ian Rapoport to report it but I’m seeing it mentioned on jsonline and in the most recent Sidelines show, one of the panelist said something like, ‘they don’t have any choice’ but to be active in free agency. While I hope they do sign at least one significant UFA, I don’t think they have to. They could spend all their cap excess on their own free agents and by extending Nelson and Cobb. As I’ve said, I don’t want that to happen, paying Raji an $8M/season deal would be a mistake IMO, but they don’t have to sign a single UFA to use up their cap excess. I don’t know what all went on inside 1265 during the 2006 off season, but the linked article doesn’t mention Thompson or Pickett. It only says the author, Brandt, raised a red flag about Woodson – the Raiders didn’t want him – and Schneider spear-headed his acquisition. One thing we can be certain of is Thompson had the final say and agreed to all the personnel moves since 2005.

IMO we see this type of thing raised by those who dislike/hate Thompson. They downplay the credit he deserves for drafting Rodgers and here any successful UFA signing. There is no question what Thompson’s MO is and even if he does sign a significant UFA or two, I don’t think that will mean a sea change for him. But particularly Packers fans should give him credit where credit is due.

Its just the flavor of the month. Seattle won the SB, so teams need to build as they do. Just like the wild cat offense and the run and shoot of yesteryear. It discredits past achievements with the proclamation that now, the NFL has changed and you can only do it one way. An idea I think is ridiculous and superficially considers the economic/talent status of the Seattle vrs the Packers.

And you are correct. If you want to give credit for FA acquisitions to other staff members, then you might just as well credit Thompson for bringing in Reggie White, who was a staff member and a proponent of the signing.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I just woke up from a dream nightmare that I was a Kansas City Chiefs fan and was posting on one of their fan boards. Whew, scary! … Seriously, can we all agree there is more than one way to build a championship team? IMO the evidence shows the advantage of Thompson’s way is to control the cap while staying in contention for several seasons consecutively. But that does not mean it’s the only way to have success; that a GM with a different MO can’t have success.

IMO we see this type of thing raised by those who dislike/hate Thompson. They downplay the credit he deserves for drafting Rodgers and here any successful UFA signing. There is no question what Thompson’s MO is and even if he does sign a significant UFA or two, I don’t think that will mean a sea change for him. But particularly Packers fans should give him credit where credit is due.

Yes, Thompson has always had the final say, though recent contracts like Rodgers' and Matthews' would require organizational consensus up to the highest levels as would be the case with any team. Conversely, Schneider and Dorsey may hold somewhat less authority...Carroll and Reid exercise considerable say, or at least veto power, that likely exceeds McCarthy's clout.

But that's not the point.

When I go into a restaurant I have final say over what I pick off the menu. But there's a collection of people who have presented the choices and who execute the preparation and service. While the analogy is not pure, since Thompson does some of his own hands-on scouting work, he still must rely on his personnel staff for a considerable amount of analysis, sifting and case-making regarding talent, while also having an eye for who would work in the scheme and be complementary to existing talent. And even with board selections coming directly from the GM, the other guys serve as sounding boards and offer critiques. One-man echo chambers don't work...anywhere.

Despite your previous protestations, Schnieder and Dorsey (and McKenzie who's been working uphill to this point) were Wolf proteges just as Thompson was. Besides the timeline, we only need to look at Schneider's and Dorsey's more Wolf-like practices in reaching outside the draft for talent once liberated to run their own shops.

The book is open on Thompson as far as I'm concerned. It's not a matter of hating or disliking; it's a matter of him being overrated. I'll reserve judgement for one more year before applying the phrase "loss of effectiveness". Nonetheless, the quality of the drafts has declined as these other guys have peeled off to other organizations. And we don't have a sense of how well Thompson's choices and grooming of replacements in scouting will work out since the departing talent was developed under other hands.

So, in looking at Schneider and Dorsey (and maybe McKenzie too now that he's cleaned house), the key question is not about different approaches to team building, though that's part of it. The elephant in the room is how well Thompson will do without these guys, and the early returns are not particularly promising.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Regarding the OP, it is merely reasonable conjecture. The team is not all that good, there's a large chunk of cap money, we have 20 players going into free agency, and we have a very young roster with a lot of unproven players.

Whether money is spent on our own guys or outsiders, the fact of the matter is we MUST sign free agents just to get to 53 players. The idea of adding another 15 draftees and UDFAs to the existing pile of young guys is not feasible, unless one wants to entertain a bona fide rebuilding program, and that's not going to happen.

Now, the pile of free cap space is not as large as it seems for the reasons previously stated, particularly the fact that $9 - $10 million is carryover...spending to the limit would be overextending given the cap space drop off the following year.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And you are correct. If you want to give credit for FA acquisitions to other staff members, then you might just as well credit Thompson for bringing in Reggie White, who was a staff member and a proponent of the signing.

Well, the thing is though that it wasn't a guy on a message board giving credit to Schneider but the former vice president of the Packers, who negotiated all contracts and managed the cap.

 

[HardRightEdge]

A couple of conditions with the new CBA argue against extending existing players before their contract year is up.

First, under the old CBA, annual cap space was use-it-or-lose-it. Now, it can be carried over to the following year. Before, it would make sense as teams got deep into the season with spare cap space to get extensions done strictly from the use-it-or-lose-it standpoint. No more.

Second, the rapid escalation of the salary cap through the 90's and 00's argued for getting core players extended as soon as possible. The market had considerably more to spend each successive year, with projections for strong cap growth out as far as the eye could see. That's not the case any more. The modest cap space increases since the CBA have been taken up mostly by QB pay which has continued to expand along with a few super-elite non-QB deals (Fitzgerald, Ngata, Mario Williams, Revis, Matthews...you know the 20 or so names). Otherwise, pay has been flat-to-down.

Third, cost of replacement through the draft is much cheaper now. Previously, extending a star player might not cost prohibitively more than replacing him with an unproven 1st. round pick, particularly if it was a top 10 pick. Draftees are now relatively more attractive cost-wise than veterans.

Unless you identify a guy as a "face of the franchise"/team identity type (like Rodgers, Matthews), the argument for early extensions (other than the restructurings to buy current cap space) is not terribly compelling.

Waiting a year might cost you somewhat more, particularly if the player breaks out to Pro Bowl level, but not as much as in the past. On the flip side, if you extend early and the guy gets hurt or his production falls off, then acting early results in considerable cost.

For example, think about where we'd be if Jennings had accepted the $10 mil per year deal offered at the start of 2012 or Raji had taken the $8 mil per at the start of 2013? We'd have two overpaid players, we would not have the cap space we have now, and Jennings' deal would have prohibited re-signing Nelson and Cobb, as if signing both won't be problematic as it is. While I doubt what was offered to Jennings and Raji were "bona fide" deals (likely light in the guarantees to limit future dead cap), the point is still there to be made.

 

[TJV]

Despite your previous protestations, Schnieder and Dorsey (and McKenzie who's been working uphill to this point) were Wolf proteges just as Thompson was.

You've gone from being pissed that I didn't care about this point to mischaracterizing what I posted (which was simply that I didn't care to which "tree" the departed front office people belonged. Obviously losing talent in the front office, like losing talent on the field, hurts.

 

[HardRightEdge]

You've gone from being pissed that I didn't care about this point to mischaracterizing what I posted (which was simply that I didn't care to which "tree" the departed front office people belonged. Obviously losing talent in the front office, like losing talent on the field, hurts.

There's "not caring" and then there's not wanting to know (which entails caring). There's a difference perhaps indistinguishable to the non-care-er or non-knower.

You stated there was no way of knowing which tree the fruit fell from. That entails enough concern and presumed analysis to render an opinion on the matter. I disagree that we have no way of knowing, or at least presenting a reasonable conjecture. You thought, and evidently think, the conjecture is unfounded.

Ergo, I misrepresented nothing.

I've gone from being frustrated with your stubbornness to being amused by it.

 

[Carl]

I have no clue how you could think to ask this.

Look, I was one of the first to say I think this Jarrett Boykin guy is pretty good.
But what we have now, considering some of you are saying let James Jones go, PALES IN COMPARSISON to what we had in 2011.

How soon we forget.

If Jones goes, as a few here say let him go, we only will have 2 of these 6 weapons left.
Boykin is the only one besides them who has done anything.

How could you even argue the statement "our depth has gone down" there?
I include Finley, but even if you don't, it's gone down. Jennings was our best one, his final year here.
Remove him, remove Driver, remove Jones, and Jermichael?
And add Boykin and Brandon Bostick?

Bottom line from me is this: James Jones is a MUST KEEP. He won't break the bank.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

I wouldn't call going from no question the best WR corp in the league to possibly the best a big knock on a GM.

 

[Vltrophy]

Nelson Cobb shield getting contracts would be big spending

Nelson & Cobb will will be resigned before or during the season. Nelson will get close to $10M per yr which is 3x more than what he's making now. Not sure what Cobb is making but I'd guess about $2M if that. He'll get about $6-8M per yr. packers will let James Jones go

 

[NOMOFO]

Nelson & Cobb will will be resigned before or during the season. Nelson will get close to $10M per yr which is 3x more than what he's making now. Not sure what Cobb is making but I'd guess about $2M if that. He'll get about $6-8M per yr. packers will let James Jones go

that's the problem. can't sign them all and all are worthy of making some serious cash.

 

[Vltrophy]

that's the problem. can't sign them all and all are worthy of making some serious cash.

Here Jones is the #3 WR. Somewhere else he could be the #1 or 2

 

[NOMOFO]

Here Jones is the #3 WR. Somewhere else he could be the #1 or 2

yep

 

[NOMOFO]

But NOMOFO thought I was crazy or had no clue when I said our receiving depth has gone down.

I can't tell if he was serious or not saying that.....

ya... I think questioning the packers receiving corps is legit nuts. They're one of the best groups in the NFL and probably the Packers strongest position other than QB. Saying TT "let that group slip" is WHACKED. nuts. INSANE. We have 2 and one could even argue 3 legit #1 receivers.

You post the photo of that group as if those guys are who they are now. cobb is a much better player than he was in 2011 and it's not even close. ...and Nelson clearly is premier... are you going to try to tell me he was the same player in 2011? Both of those two are better now. Driver was already 2 steps slower in 2011. He was already losing snaps. Finley getting hurt is not something Ted is responsible for. I also hope we resign Jones...but guess what? The problem, ironically enough, is that the Packers receiving corps is so damn good we probably won't be able to sign them all! lol

 

[TJV]

You stated there was no way of knowing which tree the fruit fell from.

Here’s exactly what I posted, “I really don't care about who influenced who by how much. In fact IMO influence goes both ways, it's mostly but not always from the more experienced to the less experienced. What I do care about is the brain drain that has taken place in Green Bay. That's undeniable and I think clearly detrimental to the franchise.”

I've gone from being frustrated with your stubbornness to being amused by it.

Good. I hope this ends your childish obsession with me not caring about something you care about.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Here’s exactly what I posted, “I really don't care about who influenced who by how much. In fact IMO influence goes both ways, it's mostly but not always from the more experienced to the less experienced. What I do care about is the brain drain that has taken place in Green Bay. That's undeniable and I think clearly detrimental to the franchise.” Good. I hope this ends your childish obsession with me not caring about something you care about.

You care too much about not caring.

You repeatedly disagree with my point that Thompson has not demonstrated the ability to develop front office personnel by repeatedly saying "we can't know", or words to that affect, as highlighted above, an opinion you're certainly entitled to.

However, you then expect to close discussion with "I don't care" in particularly vehement and insulting terms. This seems to be a sensitive issue for you.

Perhaps there's a way for you to pictorially stomp up and down?

 

[TJV]

HRE, you are embarrassing yourself with this obsession. You quoted my post on this thread, not vice versa.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I wouldn't call going from no question the best WR corp in the league to possibly the best a big knock on a GM.

We don´t have the best WR corps in the league right now, there´s no doubt about that.

 

[HardRightEdge]

HRE, you are embarrassing yourself with this obsession. You quoted my post on this thread, not vice versa.

You probably should read my last post again. In your haste and frustration, what you said here makes no sense. Perhaps, that's the way for you to go. I can't respond to gibberish.

 

[Carl]

We don´t have the best WR corps in the league right now, there´s no doubt about that.

I think it's arguable. Either way, from the best to top five at least is not something I'd call a knock on a GM.



Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think it's arguable. Either way, from the best to top five at least is not something I'd call a knock on a GM.

I don´t mean it as a knock on TT, with the salary cap it´s not possible to hold on to everyone and other guys get too old.

But with Finley probably gone I´m not sure the Packers have a top 5 pass catching unit (including TEs as well as they´re obviously pretty important in the receiving game as well) even if James Jones would be re-signed.

 

[TJV]

This is the last I'll post on this unless hre just can't help himself:

You probably should read my last post again.

You mean the post you edited after I responded to it? (How disingenuous of you.)

However, you then expect to close discussion with "I don't care" in particularly vehement and insulting terms.

Again, my initial reaction to what you must think was a brilliant idea was, "I really don't care about who influenced who by how much." You childishly bristled at that mild statement and then continued to pout about it, even going so far as to nitpick my use of the word "income" in another thread. Perhaps I should feel flattered that you think so much of my opinions that you just couldn't handle me not caring about something you posted. But I'm not flattered; I'm just waiting for you to get over what you apparently perceive as the wounding of your pride. Others won't always agree with what you think important is important. This has already gotten old and no doubt tedious for others: Get over it.

 

[NOMOFO]

I don´t mean it as a knock on TT, with the salary cap it´s not possible to hold on to everyone and other guys get too old.

But with Finley probably gone I´m not sure the Packers have a top 5 pass catching unit (including TEs as well as they´re obviously pretty important in the receiving game as well) even if James Jones would be re-signed.

Please name 4 better with Jones. There's not. With Finley they are "the" best. Without him, they're still close to it. Without JJ and Finley, well, now we need to see more from Boykin and whatever TE ends with the job, but Cobb and Nelson are no joke. Those two alone puts them near the top.

I honestly don't think Jordy gets nearly enough credit for being a legit bonified superstar. I'd love to know what other 4 are better however. We had this "debate" a month ago and we didn't see the list.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Please name 4 better with Jones. There's not.

I´m quite sure you probably won´t accept any one of them, but here are teams I think can at least compete with our receiving corps: Philadelphia, NY Giants, Dallas, Chicago, Detroit, New Orleans, Atlanta, New England, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Denver and San Diego.