Free Agents you would like to see sign with Green Bay in 2019?

[brandon2348]

I don't have any expectations, only the understanding that if you blow dough on old players on the downside of their careers or those with an injury history you're not likely to get what you expect. Take Graham for example. So, don't do that.

So far John Dorsey looks like the guy we should of brought in.

 

[HardRightEdge]

So far John Dorsey looks like the guy we should of brought in.

I wouldn't argue with that, but the problem is he was already hired by Cleveland. I suppose you could say Murphy was a day late and dollar short in kicking Thompson upstairs. I wouldn't write off Gutekunst, though. I like his first draft; we'll just have to see where he goes from here.

A couple things to note about Dorsey. First, he has no problem bringing in trouble makers, whether it's Landry or Randall or now Kareem Hunt. This runs counter to the alleged Packer ethos. Second, Dorsey has had the benefit of some high picks in his short tenure to date. Third, he was sitting on a mountain of cap going into last season without spending much of it and he's got a bigger mountain now. Whether he's on a tight cash budget in one of the less lucrative markets or he's not willing spend big in free agency until he's confident he already has the core roster to make a run, I could not say.

This last point goes to the issue at the center of our discussion, to wit:

I'm expecting and predicting a very aggressive approach to the 2019 season and it has nothing to do with my health.

I realize that when I do a cap breakdown most eyes glaze over before the punch line, so here I'll cut to the bottom line of my recent post: the Packers effective cap space to be allocated to free agency, taking into account the cost of the upcoming draft, the PS and a reasonable PUP/IR reserve, currently stands at aobut $24 mil.

More can be gained by cutting certain vet starters, but then that's more holes to fill whether those players are overpaid or not, and that has to be done before the roster bonuses hit and before the draft where the ability to replace them in uncertain.

So how many Earl Thomas' can you effectively buy in your "win now" scenario? How many angels can fit on the head of a pin? Not many, I'd say.

It's probably worth asking how much difference will Earl Thomas make? Seattle was 2-2 last season with him (or 1-2 depending on how you look at the game he was injured); 8-4 (or 9-3) without him. Not that he wasn't a great player playing great, it's just that he was (and would be) one piece in big puzzle. Maybe not having him around constantly griping about money had a positive offset. And if you had Dorsey's cap space and dumped it on small pile of Earl Thomases, you could very well end up with a group of players that just don't mesh, like the Philly "Dream Team", and then spend years taking it apart and rebuilding it.

But you don't have that cap space, so that takes us back to those angels.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Question: who was Earl Thomas flipping the finger at on the sideliens when he was carted off the field? The logical answer is Pete Carroll, the guy who wouldn't pay him. That's a bit ironic given that Caroll's decision was immediately made prescient.

When you think about a guy who flips off his paymaster where everyone in the world can see, who's the guy least likely to care? Thomas to Cleveland?

Earl Thomas is not a Packer decision to make or not make; it's a fan fixation.

 

[brandon2348]

I wouldn't argue with that, but the problem is he was already hired by Cleveland. I suppose you could say Murphy was a day late and dollar short in kicking Thompson upstairs. I wouldn't write off Gutekunst, though. I like his first draft; we'll just have to see where he goes from here.

A couple things to note about Dorsey. First, he has no problem bringing in trouble makers, whether it's Landry or Randall or now Kareem Hunt. This runs counter to the alleged Packer ethos. Second, Dorsey has had the benefit of some high picks in his short tenure to date. Third, he was sitting on a mountain of cap going into last season without spending much of it and he's got a bigger mountain now. Whether he's on a tight cash budget in one of the less lucrative markets or he's not willing spend big in free agency until he's confident he already has the core roster to make a run, I could not say.

This last point goes to the issue at the center of our discussion, to wit:



I realize that when I do a cap breakdown most eyes glaze over before the punch line, so here I'll cut to the bottom line of my recent post: the Packers effective cap space to be allocated to free agency, taking into account the cost of the upcoming draft, the PS and a reasonable PUP/IR reserve, currently stands at aobut $24 mil.

More can be gained by cutting certain vet starters, but then that's more holes to fill whether those players are overpaid or not, and that has to be done before the roster bonuses hit and before the draft where the ability to replace them in uncertain.

So how many Earl Thomas' can you effectively buy in your "win now" scenario? How many angels can fit on the head of a pin? Not many, I'd say.

It's probably worth asking how much difference will Earl Thomas make? Seattle was 2-2 last season with him (or 1-2 depending on how you look at the game he was injured); 8-4 (or 9-3) without him. Not that he wasn't a great player playing great, it's just that he was (and would be) one piece in big puzzle. Maybe not having him around constantly griping about money had a positive offset. And if you had Dorsey's cap space and dumped it on small pile of Earl Thomases, you could very well end up with a group of players that just don't mesh, like the Philly "Dream Team", and then spend years taking it apart and rebuilding it.

But you don't have that cap space, so that takes us back to those angels.

There is no quick fix to complete the entire roster. Not unless Gute has the draft of the ages. The mind meld of fixing this roster is no easy task. My take is there gonna need to get more creative and take on some more player types(checkered pasts) like Dorsey does. I know that makes some Packer fans cringe but this is where were at.

This is precisely why I have been wanting the Packers to just load up the offense and score a ton of points and try to get in that way in this new all offense league. Get a timely turnover and win a coin toss and get lucky. They have the picks and capital to make the necessary moves on that side of the ball.

The defense IMO is just so far away and I don't believe another round of defensive picks will do much of anything but create more frustration and resentment. Pettine showed he can run a band-aid operation on defense and that might be just what we need for the rest of the Rodgers era.

 

[HardRightEdge]

There is no quick fix to complete the entire roster. Not unless Gute has the draft of the ages. The mind meld of fixing this roster is no easy task. My take is there gonna need to get more creative and take on some more player types(checkered pasts) like Dorsey does. I know that makes some Packer fans cringe but this is where were at.

This is precisely why I have been wanting the Packers to just load up the offense and score a ton of points and try to get in that way in this new all offense league. Get a timely turnover and win a coin toss and get lucky. They have the picks and capital to make the necessary moves on that side of the ball.

The defense IMO is just so far away and I don't believe another round of defensive picks will do much of anything but create more frustration and resentment. Pettine showed he can run a band-aid operation on defense and that might be just what we need for the rest of the Rodgers era.

In case you didn't realize it, this contradicts your stumping for Earl Thomas. "Just outscore 'em" rarely reaches the ultimate goal. This is not an "all offense" league. Defenses firmed up as the season went on, culiminating in the SB, as the league took a "let 'em play" tack. Offenses innovate, defenses adjust, then the league changes rules to favor the offense, then the league dials it back, then offenses retool to exploit whatever comes next. As New England showed, you need to have more than one way to win football games, and whatever your defensive stats may say you are during the season, you better bring some D as you move through the playoffs.

 

[brandon2348]

In case you didn't realize it, this contradicts your stumping for Earl Thomas. "Just outscore 'em" rarely reaches the ultimate goal. This is not an "all offense" league. Defenses firmed up as the season went on, culiminating in the SB, as the league took a "let 'em play" tack. Offenses innovate, defenses adjust, then the league changes rules to favor the offense, then the league dials it back, then offenses retool to exploit whatever comes next. As New England showed, you need to have more than one way to win football games, and whatever your defensive stats may say you are during the season, you better bring some D as you move through the playoffs.

Ive been on and off and on with the Earl Thomas situation. I vision him playing single high with our young corners but then rationalize not spending the $ with injury and age concerns on top of him being a hot head.

I kind of see Kansas City as the blueprint for the Packers success moving forward. Yes, NE beat them but if a guy doesn't line up offsides KC wins that game with the worst defense in the NFL.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It's a pipe dream that Earl Thomas would agree to a reasonable prove it deal. It's definitely more likely that he will ask for a multi-year contract paying him top money at the position. The Packers shouldn't be interested in him.

I'd also like to bring up another Thomas, Demaryius. He wants to still play, and while his production has dropped, so has the QB play in Denver. I think AR covers the spread on him. Outside of a WR in the 1st Round(which I'm strongly against), I think he easily replicates the production from Cobb if he's sent packing. Based on how he trashed Denver and Elway he could be a real team guy who's willing to take a team friendly deal.

The Broncos traded Thomas to Houston during last season. With the Texans setting to release him I don't consider him much of an upgrade at this point in his career.

 

[Dantés]

Per Michael Cohen, Wilkerson is hoping to come back to GB for one more season to rebuild his value. I'd be all for it on a reasonable, one year deal.

Lowry and Wilkerson at 5T

Clark and Lancaster at shade

Daniels and a rookie/Adams at 3T

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Per Michael Cohen, Wilkerson is hoping to come back to GB for one more season to rebuild his value. I'd be all for it on a reasonable, one year deal.

Not that he is going to probably say differently, but I do like this quote from Wilkerson.

“I like it here a lot,” Wilkerson said. “I came here to prove that I can play at a high level and that was cut short."

Before the injury he wasn't playing like the beast I thought we might be getting, but he may even be hungrier now and even play for less than the $5M he got last season. As usual, sign the guy, if the price is right.

 

[Mondio]

I think Wilkerson was doing good, but you're right, he wasn't regularly destroying people. BUT, guys with wear on their bodies seem to work technique and play solid, but turn it up later in the year. He wasn't getting blown off the ball, and it seemed when he wanted to, he could turn it on. I think he was just starting to build up, hadn't even hit midseason form yet. I don't know how he comes back from the injury, but I don't think we saw the best of Wilkerson last year. I'd like him back.

 

[Dantés]

Not that he is going to probably say differently, but I do like this quote from Wilkerson.

“I like it here a lot,” Wilkerson said. “I came here to prove that I can play at a high level and that was cut short."

Before the injury he wasn't playing like the beast I thought we might be getting, but he may even be hungrier now and even play for less than the $5M he got last season. As usual, sign the guy, if the price is right.

Agree. He had not regained his old, elite form, but he was a good starting caliber player. Given that Dean Lowry is also a solid player in his own right, platooning them could be a really effective strategy.

 

[Dantés]

As some of the cap casualties have started to roll in, I thought I would highlight some of the more interesting names that could potentially be let go this offseason. Keep in mind, I'm not saying that all of these guys necessarily will get cut, or that the Packers should pursue all of them, but they're guys to keep an eye on.

• Lesean McCoy, RB, BUF, 30: 6.4M
• Lamar Miller, RB, HOU, 27: 6.2M
• Emmanuel Sanders, WR, DEN, 31: 10M
• Nelson Agholor, WR, PHI, 25: 9.4M
• Allen Hurns, WR, DAL, 27: 5M
• Travis Benjamin, WR, LAC, 29: 5M
• Devante Parker, WR, MIA, 26: 9.4M
• Dwayne Allen, TE, NE, 28: 7.4M
• Cameron Brate, TE, TB, 27: 7M
• Kelechi Osemele, G, OAK, 29: 10.2M
• T.J. Lang, G, DET, 31: 9M
• Timmy Jernigan, DL, PHI, 26: 7M
• Malik Jackson, DL, JAC, 29: 11M
• Marcell Dareus, DL, JAC, 29: 10.5M
• Michael Brockers, DL, LAR, 28: 10M
• Gerald McCoy, DL, TB, 30: 13M
• Jason Pierre-Paul, ED, TB, 29: 14.7M
• Robert Quinn, ED, MIA, 29: 13M
• Justin Houston, ED, KC, 30: 14M
• Jabaal Sheard, ED, IND, 29: 8M
• Vic Beasley, ED, ATL, 26: 12.8M
• Jamie Collins, LB, CLE, 29: 9.25M
• Sean Lee, LB, DAL, 32:7M
• Jimmy Smith, CB, BAL, 30: 9.5M
• Dre Kirkpatrick, CB, CIN, 29: 6.7M
• Kevin Johnson, CB, HOU, 26: 9.1M
• Eric Weddle, S, BAL, 34: 6.5M

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

As some of the cap casualties have started to roll in, I thought I would highlight some of the more interesting names that could potentially be let go this offseason. Keep in mind, I'm not saying that all of these guys necessarily will get cut, or that the Packers should pursue all of them, but they're guys to keep an eye on.

• Lesean McCoy, RB, BUF, 30: 6.4M
• Lamar Miller, RB, HOU, 27: 6.2M
• Emmanuel Sanders, WR, DEN, 31: 10M
• Nelson Agholor, WR, PHI, 25: 9.4M
• Allen Hurns, WR, DAL, 27: 5M
• Travis Benjamin, WR, LAC, 29: 5M
• Devante Parker, WR, MIA, 26: 9.4M
• Dwayne Allen, TE, NE, 28: 7.4M
• Cameron Brate, TE, TB, 27: 7M
• Kelechi Osemele, G, OAK, 29: 10.2M
• T.J. Lang, G, DET, 31: 9M
• Timmy Jernigan, DL, PHI, 26: 7M
• Malik Jackson, DL, JAC, 29: 11M
• Marcell Dareus, DL, JAC, 29: 10.5M
• Michael Brockers, DL, LAR, 28: 10M
• Gerald McCoy, DL, TB, 30: 13M
• Jason Pierre-Paul, ED, TB, 29: 14.7M
• Robert Quinn, ED, MIA, 29: 13M
• Justin Houston, ED, KC, 30: 14M
• Jabaal Sheard, ED, IND, 29: 8M
• Vic Beasley, ED, ATL, 26: 12.8M
• Jamie Collins, LB, CLE, 29: 9.25M
• Sean Lee, LB, DAL, 32:7M
• Jimmy Smith, CB, BAL, 30: 9.5M
• Dre Kirkpatrick, CB, CIN, 29: 6.7M
• Kevin Johnson, CB, HOU, 26: 9.1M
• Eric Weddle, S, BAL, 34: 6.5M

Sign them all at Vet minimum and the team friendly discount!

 

[sschind]

As some of the cap casualties have started to roll in, I thought I would highlight some of the more interesting names that could potentially be let go this offseason. Keep in mind, I'm not saying that all of these guys necessarily will get cut, or that the Packers should pursue all of them, but they're guys to keep an eye on.

• Lesean McCoy, RB, BUF, 30: 6.4M
• Lamar Miller, RB, HOU, 27: 6.2M
• Emmanuel Sanders, WR, DEN, 31: 10M
• Nelson Agholor, WR, PHI, 25: 9.4M
• Allen Hurns, WR, DAL, 27: 5M
• Travis Benjamin, WR, LAC, 29: 5M
• Devante Parker, WR, MIA, 26: 9.4M
• Dwayne Allen, TE, NE, 28: 7.4M
• Cameron Brate, TE, TB, 27: 7M
• Kelechi Osemele, G, OAK, 29: 10.2M
• T.J. Lang, G, DET, 31: 9M
• Timmy Jernigan, DL, PHI, 26: 7M
• Malik Jackson, DL, JAC, 29: 11M
• Marcell Dareus, DL, JAC, 29: 10.5M
• Michael Brockers, DL, LAR, 28: 10M
• Gerald McCoy, DL, TB, 30: 13M
• Jason Pierre-Paul, ED, TB, 29: 14.7M
• Robert Quinn, ED, MIA, 29: 13M
• Justin Houston, ED, KC, 30: 14M
• Jabaal Sheard, ED, IND, 29: 8M
• Vic Beasley, ED, ATL, 26: 12.8M
• Jamie Collins, LB, CLE, 29: 9.25M
• Sean Lee, LB, DAL, 32:7M
• Jimmy Smith, CB, BAL, 30: 9.5M
• Dre Kirkpatrick, CB, CIN, 29: 6.7M
• Kevin Johnson, CB, HOU, 26: 9.1M
• Eric Weddle, S, BAL, 34: 6.5M

Two things are certain if they do get cut. One is they will all get their own "should we sign..." threads and the second is that within each of those threads someone will say "I wouldn't sign him for minimum"

 

[RepStar15]

I want to bring up an important point here. In recent history, when the Packers have brought in big contract guys in free agency, it has not planned out. Granted we do not have a large pool the choose from due to TT’s lack of aggressiveness in FA, but it makes me nervous signing any bigger name.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I want to bring up an important point here. In recent history, when the Packers have brought in big contract guys in free agency, it has not planned out. Granted we do not have a large pool the choose from due to TT’s lack of aggressiveness in FA, but it makes me nervous signing any bigger name.

It's true that Graham didn't perform up to expectations last season but Thompson was actually pretty successful when signing big name free agents. Unfortunately he mostly ignored free agency though.

 

[PackAttack12]

I want to bring up an important point here. In recent history, when the Packers have brought in big contract guys in free agency, it has not planned out. Granted we do not have a large pool the choose from due to TT’s lack of aggressiveness in FA, but it makes me nervous signing any bigger name.

It's true that Graham didn't perform up to expectations last season but Thompson was actually pretty successful when signing big name free agents. Unfortunately he mostly ignored free agency though.

I'm optimistic that Graham will have a nice bounce back year in 2019.

 

[Mondio]

I hope he does, i hope there's a bit better plan to use the TE's we have. I'm tentative on that happening though. On some plays Graham seemed into it and like what I'd expect. On others he seemed disinterested and he dropped some I'd expect a TE of his caliber to get most of the time. If he's dedicated to football still, I think he will. If he's more concerned about other things, I'm worried we might get more of the same.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm optimistic that Graham will have a nice bounce back year in 2019.

Actually Graham wasn't even as bad in 2018 as some Packers fans want us to believe.

 

[PackAttack12]

I hope he does, i hope there's a bit better plan to use the TE's we have. I'm tentative on that happening though. On some plays Graham seemed into it and like what I'd expect. On others he seemed disinterested and he dropped some I'd expect a TE of his caliber to get most of the time. If he's dedicated to football still, I think he will. If he's more concerned about other things, I'm worried we might get more of the same.

I definitely expect to see more TE usage in LaFleur's offense.

 

[PackAttack12]

Actually Graham wasn't even as bad in 2018 as some Packers fans want us to believe.

Totally agree that his "bad season" has been highly exaggerated and overblown, but he could certainly have an even bigger impact like he's had in the past.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Actually Graham wasn't even as bad in 2018 as some Packers fans want us to believe.

Agree and would add that the Packer offense in 2018 as a whole wasn't performing at their normal standards, including their QB. While I wouldn't use that as a complete get out of jail free card for Graham, I think he will have a better 2019 season, if the Packers offense has a better year as a unit.

 

[PackAttack12]

Agree and would add that the Packer offense in 2018 as a whole wasn't performing at their normal standards, including their QB. While I wouldn't use that as a complete get out of jail free card for Graham, I think he will have a better 2019 season, if the Packers offense has a better year as a unit.

Yeah some of the same people that have been lambasting Rodgers for having a subpar year are also poo pooing on what Graham was or wasn't able to do.

Rodgers deserves some culpability in that.

I think this whole notion of Graham not performing will be debunked fairly early in the 2019 season.

 

[Mondio]

Actually Graham wasn't even as bad in 2018 as some Packers fans want us to believe.

From a numbers standpoint I agree completely. It was a decent enough season. BUT, there were more than a couple times he just didn't seem that aggressive to the ball, or the ball went right thru his hands on what should have been a trademark Graham play and another 1st down for us. Or TD's where he just couldn't out jump, out position or out muscle a smaller defender for the ball.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

From a numbers standpoint I agree completely. It was a decent enough season. BUT, there were more than a couple times he just didn't seem that aggressive to the ball, or the ball went right thru his hands on what should have been a trademark Graham play and another 1st down for us. Or TD's where he just couldn't out jump, out position or out muscle a smaller defender for the ball.

There's no doubt Graham had some terrible plays as well. Overall he didn't perform up to expectations but aside of touchdowns nevertheless put up decent numbers.