Karlos Dansby - Yes or No or For How Long?

[Patriotplayer90]

What's done is done. We ain't getting it back. Won't help us to sign anyone else this off season to continue to complain about it.

It was a horrible business decision that cost the team addressing a position of need, if we had a GM who would even participate in free agency. You can downplay it, but you can be a fan of the team and still think the GM is doing a bad job.

 

[Poppa San]

It was a horrible business decision that cost the team addressing a position of need, if we had a GM who would even participate in free agency. You can downplay it, but you can be a fan of the team and still think the GM is doing a bad job.

Yep but sooner or later, continuous complaints of the same event loses its appeal. You ain't going to change the past. Got to let go once in a while. Like a one trick pony you need new material.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yep but sooner or later, continuous complaints of the same event loses its appeal. You ain't going to change the past. Got to let go once in a while. Like a one trick pony you need new material.

Actually I think it's Thompson that should change his approach. Him overpaying to keep his draft picks around and mostly ignoring free agency has lost its appeal.

 

[longtimefan]

Yep but sooner or later, continuous complaints of the same event loses its appeal. You ain't going to change the past. Got to let go once in a while. Like a one trick pony you need new material.

Doing same thing over and over expecting different result..

Thats people complaining every year

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Doing same thing over and over expecting different result..

Thats people complaining every year

I agree there is no point in complaining, but can you blame us? We are tired of losing each year. We want roster moves that will make us better, not eat up cap space while not improving us whatsoever.

It's clear that other top teams have more talent and that we'll need to play the game of our lives in order to beat them in the playoffs, and i don't see a couple of rookies making us much better.

 

[Half Empty]

Complaining is the only joy we get. TT gets to cash enormous paychecks. Throw seven figures in my account, and you can complain about anything I do, all day long (and, I wouldn't even know it).

 

[Poppa San]

Actually I think it's Thompson that should change his approach. Him overpaying to keep his draft picks around and mostly ignoring free agency has lost its appeal.

I'll make sure to tell him your concerns next time I see him at the Gas+Go. Or you can email his boss. Last time I saw him give a speech he said he reads every one. I am sure your well thought out prose will inspire him to get on Ted's case to change his ways.

 

[RRyder]

I agree there is no point in complaining, but can you blame us? We are tired of losing each year. We want roster moves that will make us better, not eat up cap space while not improving us whatsoever.

It's clear that other top teams have more talent and that we'll need to play the game of our lives in order to beat them in the playoffs, and i don't see a couple of rookies making us much better.

I wouldn't say any of that is "clear"

 

[HardRightEdge]

How with less than 13.1 with Neal and Kuhn still left...

Then Sitton, Lang and or Backtari..

I asked this numerous times in last week, but no one can answer it

They will be cheaper players available at cut downs, or maybe sooner once replacements are secured in the draft, to fill out the bottom of the roster. There are several guys who have been around for a couple years who are "just guys" or worse who could be upgraded.

The only other possibility that would allow buying somebody more pricey would be a surprise cut of somebody who would yield some meaningful cap space or somebody getting negotiated down for 2016. See the "cap savings" column in the following link; that tells you the cap amount picked up if the guy was cut, or one can look at the actual cap numbers to identify situations where it could be worked down for 2016 in a renegotiation/extension:

http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/green-bay-packers/

Frankly, I don't see any obvious opportunities or likely candidates. Does anybody think Thompson will slap Peppers in the face proposing a worked down one year deal? He'd have to extend him at least another year to get it to work without being an insult. I don't think that will happen. Or how about jumping the gun a year and cut Sitton to pick up cap room? I don't think so.

One possibility is if Sitton or Lang or both (more likely just Lang) is extended now with the last year in the current deal rewritten with a low base salary and a big signing bonus, back loading the cap hit to future years. You could pick up a couple of mil for this year.

Note we're at $148 mil for the top 51, not including Starks who is not yet added to that list.

Still to do:

1) You have to add a couple mil for the upper round picks getting paid more than the bottom of the roster guys they replace.

2) In addition to Starks, you have to add in one additional guy not in the current top 51 to get to the 53 man roster. Call it about a half mil for a minimum salary rookie.

3) You need about $1 mil for the practice squad.

4) You need about $3 mil minimum in reserve for replacements for guys who go on IR. And that only buys about 6 - 7 minimum salary rookie replacements.

5) Whatever is left over can carry over to 2017.

I hate to say I told you so (actually not so much), but I illustrated a year ago why 2017 free agency would be a pinch, but I don't recall one single note of agreement at the time.

The bailout would be if the cap is going up more appreciably than to the $155 mil commonly projected. Then again, when the cap goes up so does salary inflation...as we see in recent Crosby, Perry and Starks deals.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

Obviously Karlos Dansby isn't an option for the Packers since he wasn't drafted by the Packers and/or played for the Packers last year.

 

[longtimefan]

They will be cheaper players available at cut downs, or maybe sooner once replacements are secured in the draft, to fill out the bottom of the roster. There are several guys who have been around for a couple years who are "just guys" or worse who could be upgraded.

The only other possibility that would allow buying somebody more pricey would be a surprise cut of somebody who would yield some meaningful cap space or somebody getting negotiated down for 2016. See the "cap savings" column in the following link; that tells you the cap amount picked up if the guy was cut, or one can look at the actual cap numbers to identify situations where it could be worked down for 2016 in a renegotiation/extension:

http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/green-bay-packers/

Frankly, I don't see any obvious opportunities or likely candidates. Does anybody think Thompson will slap Peppers in the face proposing a worked down one year deal? He'd have to extend him at least another year to get it to work without being an insult. I don't think that will happen. Or how about jumping the gun a year and cut Sitton to pick up cap room? I don't think so.

One possibility is if Sitton or Lang or both (more likely just Lang) is extended now with the last year in the current deal rewritten with a low base salary and a big signing bonus, back loading the cap hit to future years. You could a pick up a couple of mil for this year.

Note we're at $148 mil for the top 51, not including Starks who is not yet added to that list.

Still to do:

1) You have to add a couple mil for the upper round picks getting paid more than the bottom of the roster guys they replace.

2) In addition to Starks, you have to add in one additional guy not in the current top 51 to get to the 53 man roster. Call it about a half mil for minimum salary rookie.

3) You need about $1 mil for the practice squad.

4) You need about $3 mil minimum in reserve for replacements for guys who go on IR. And that only buys about 6 - 7 minimum salary rookie replacements.

5) Whatever is left over can carry over to 2017.

I hate to say I told you so (actually not so much), but I illustrated a year ago why 2017 free agency would be a pinch, but I don't recall one single note of agreement at the time.

The bailout would be if the cap is going up more appreciably than to the $155 mil commonly projected. Then again, when the cap goes up so does salary inflation...as we see in recent Crosby, Perry and Starks deals.

Fyi- I'm in agreement with you..

I been wanting people to think how do we sign people with not a ton of money and the need to extend vital pieces...

No one would break it down.. (I knew what had to be done, but you are only one that took time)

Wish others would have taken time, maybe a light bulb would went off seeing it on paper.

 

[thequick12]

I would like to sign Dansby for a reasonable short-term deal as well but no way should we offer him anything close to $4-5 million a season.

Well I'd like to sign him for less too but realistically he's not gonna sign anywhere for less than 4 million a season

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Well I'd like to sign him for less too but realistically he's not gonna sign anywhere for less than 4 million a season

Well, if that's true I'm not interested in the Packers signing him.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Fyi- I'm in agreement with you..

I been wanting people to think how do we sign people with not a ton of money and the need to extend vital pieces...

No one would break it down.. (I knew what had to be done, but you are only one that took time)

Wish others would have taken time, maybe a light bulb would went off seeing it on paper.

First, I should note that OverTheCap has added Starks since my last post. The Packers are now at $151.2 mil in cap commitments for just the current top 51.

I could see you were in agreement. You've not gotten an answer because there isn't one, as you well know. I think there are 4 tendencies that come into play when someone isn't looking at the details:

1) There's an inclination to picture the roster the way it looked at the end of the season and then focus on needed additions without accounting for all of the free agent subtractions that need to be replaced or resigned.

2) Not appreciating what the top 51 number does not include.

3) An underappreciation of the fact that with the rising cap comes salary inflation. I fall victim to this myself. We can look at Crosby for example, and say he's not the #2 kicker in the league which is where his new contract placed him at the time.

But it's a 5 year deal. By year 3 or 4 or 5, he's likely down in the middle of the pack or lower with the current salary inflation trajectory. Tucker from Baltimore has already skipped over him to #1 in season average, albeit on a one year deal.

 

[PackerDNA]

If they were to consider Dansby for $4M per, then they should have signed Freeman for $4M per.

 

[RRyder]

If they were to consider Dansby for $4M per, then they should have signed Freeman for $4M per.

Sure. But I can't believe they're looking at him for 4M a year. Probably more like a 2 year 2M per deal.

 

[PackerDNA]

Sure. But I can't believe they're looking at him for 4M a year. Probably more like a 2 year 2M per deal.

Agreed, although IMO he won't bite.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Sure. But I can't believe they're looking at him for 4M a year. Probably more like a 2 year 2M per deal.

Most likely the Packers don't look at him at all.

 

[RRyder]

Agreed, although IMO he won't bite.

I agree but the longer he sits in FA the more possible it becomes.

 

[SoonerPack]

I would love to see Dansby signed! The guy is a proven commodity and can still cover better than most guys 6-10 years his junior. Personally, I still believe Jake Ryan will end up being better than expected in coverage. His athleticism is underrated and with each snap I expect to see a nice improvement in the coverage department. With all that being said, Dansby could be a huge upgrade at the ILB position giving us both production and a steadying force in the middle. The guy has 8 INT's taking 4 of them to the house the past 3 years for crying out loud! He's a playmaker and for the right price would be a significant upgrade @ MLB. Doubt it happens but it's hard to see many negatives when contemplating this possible signing.
G P G !!

 

[4zone]

Anybody know what the Vet minimum for Dansby would be?

 

[4zone]

At the stage of his career, he might accept vet min. on a team with a shot for a SB title. Playing with Matthews and Peppers has to sound pretty good to a guy in his twilight.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Sure. But I can't believe they're looking at him for 4M a year. Probably more like a 2 year 2M per deal.

Dansby is saying 2016 will be his Defensive Player of the Year season; he still chafes at being robbed of the award when it was given to Kuechly. He says this year there will be recompense.

Certainly if one had mixed fellings about such boasts it would be justified, but one thing you can bank on, pun intended: he does not sound like a guy willing to take anything close to the vet minimum of $985,000 for guys with 10+ years of service.

 

[RRyder]

Dansby is saying 2016 will be his Defensive Player of the Year season; he still chafes at being robbed of the award when it was given to Kuechly. He says this year there will be recompense.

Certainly if one had mixed fellings about such boasts it would be justified, but one thing you can bank on, pun intended: he does not sound like a guy willing to take anything close to the vet minimum of $985,000 for guys with 10+ years of service.

True. But it also doesn't seem like teams are banging down his door for his services. Probably won't sign anywhere till after the draft and by then I'm thinking his asking price will have dropped

 

[HardRightEdge]

True. But it also doesn't seem like teams are banging down his door for his services. Probably won't sign anywhere till after the draft and by then I'm thinking his asking price will have dropped.

That's a plausible scenario, but nothing like a million bucks. All it takes is a few teams coming out of the draft without the ILB they'd like, which is likely given the thinness of the draft class, for there to be enough interest for a meeting in the middle on a one or two year deal. He may be 34, but he showed last year he can still play, even if DPOY is a pipe dream.

We're in an era where core special teamers who are marginal rotational/backup players can take down $2 mil. What do pay for a front line ILB who still has some game?