1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

My 2 rookies who would start from day 1..

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by rodell330, Jan 21, 2014.

  1. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,985
    Ratings:
    +1,010

    Ignore the big picture? lol ok pot calling kettle black eh?? yea sounds like it.
     
  2. NOMOFO

    NOMOFO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,105
    Ratings:
    +394
    Not to mention that there is seldom "value" is paying for the contracts that come along with the much higher slotted players.
     
  3. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,216
    Ratings:
    +626
    That's not entirely true any more since the rookie salary cap started. The rookie salary cap essentially made the top half of the draft a low risk/high reward situation. If you hit on a player such as JJ Watt, you get an All-Pro for 4 years/$12M. The Colts get Andrew Luck for 4years/$22M. The "value" is there if you draft the right player.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. NOMOFO

    NOMOFO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,105
    Ratings:
    +394
    no question... but if the guy isn't as "special" as a JJ Watt or Luck... then you're stuck. It's just my opinion... but we see year after year many top picks end up being less than anything special. I would rather invest in proven players.
     
  5. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,514
    Ratings:
    +2,437
    Morgan Burnett is making more than the first overall pick, so I would be fine investing the money in a high draft pick (not saying we should trade up or anything like that, just meaning the cap hit for a high draft pick isn't a huge risk anymore)
     
  6. NOMOFO

    NOMOFO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,105
    Ratings:
    +394
    I'm not even talking about the cap hit specifically. I said many times, I'm fine with a high pick if it's a home run sure bet pick. That's one reason some teams trade out... they don't think there's cost justification.
     
  7. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,514
    Ratings:
    +2,437
    No, your thinking here is just plain and simple wrong. Before the rookie wage scale was introduced in the new CBA teams didn't want to hold on to their high draft picks because of the financial commitment they had to make to a player who never played a single down in the NFL. But they didn't find another team giving away draft picks and wanting to pay that kind of money to a rookie.

    It's totally different now. Teams with a high draft pick can either hold on to their pick and fill obvious needs without having to make a major commitment (see Indy drafting Luck), or trade it away because other teams are willed to give up multiple draft picks to trade up, cause once again, they don't have to screw up their cap for a top pick (see St. Louis trading away their #2 pick to Washington for RGIII, getting three first and a second round pick in return).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. NOMOFO

    NOMOFO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,105
    Ratings:
    +394
    I'm not wrong in the least. There's still a larger commitment to early picks than later picks. The slot doesn't change that. They talk about this all the time on and around draft day.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  9. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,514
    Ratings:
    +2,437
    It would be great if you would admit being wrong at least once. No teams shy away from the financial commitment for a top pick anymore.

    Do you realize all of the #1 picks since the rookie wage scale was introduced got less money than Hawk and Raji got in their rookie deals???

    The only reason teams trade out of these picks is because they want to get additional picks and don't think a single player at their spot would make a huge impact.
     
  10. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,936
    Ratings:
    +3,031
    No, you are wrong 'in the most'. There's no question the rookie wage scale has dramatically changed how teams view picks at the top of the draft. Andrew Luck signed a 4-year $22.1M contract with a $14.5M signing bonus. Sam Bradford, the top pick in 2010, signed a 6-year, $78M contract with $50M guaranteed. To spell it out for you, regarding the guaranteed money in the two contracts: $50M is more than twice as much as $22.1M. It doesn't matter if you want to admit it or not, any fan with a passing knowledge of the difference the most recent CBA made, knows you're wrong.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. GreenDeath

    GreenDeath Canuck

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Ratings:
    +11
    There isn't a possibility that Clowney and Barr drop down to us. It's a pipe dream, unless we give up the farm(multiple first rounders and 2nd and/or 3rd rounders) we are not moving up into the Top 7 which is where they will almost certainly go.

    More realistic targets are Khalil Mack(who might even go ahead of Barr is he blows up the combine, but he's probably going in the top 12) or Louis Nix, the NT from Notre Dame. Both of those guys are day one starters for us and fill a need, especially Nix. I don't see TT breaking the bank to resign Raji.
     
  12. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,514
    Ratings:
    +2,437
    Nix is a talented guy, but the knee injury that ended his 2013 season is a big concern for me, especially with our strength and conditioning staff.
     
  13. GreenDeath

    GreenDeath Canuck

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Ratings:
    +11
    That's a good point. And with big guys like that, knee injuries are more of a concern because of the amount of force that is cranking on the ligaments and joints every game. It's going to be one of those "is the risk worth the reward" type scenarios. If he passes the medical and he's there at our spot, you almost have to take him if Raji isn't on the roster anymore. Unless we're magically changing to the 4-3, not having a NT in the 3-4 is suicide.
     
  14. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,514
    Ratings:
    +2,437
    I agree that we need a NT cause we're not changing to a 4-3. Maybe Pickett has another productive season in him, don't think there are many other impact NTs as Nix available.
     
  15. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,128
    Ratings:
    +4,083
    Hageman some say. i really like the kid out of pitt if you can get over his height.
     
  16. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,514
    Ratings:
    +2,437
    Hageman's 6-6 and 318, rather have him play DE in a 3-4. Are you talking about Aaron Donald out of Pitt??? That guy weighs 288!!!
     
  17. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,128
    Ratings:
    +4,083
  18. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,514
    Ratings:
    +2,437
  19. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,128
    Ratings:
    +4,083
    What about it? You dont think a player like geno would be successful on the line in either the 3-4 or 4-3? Obviously he would need to move around.
     
  20. GreenDeath

    GreenDeath Canuck

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Ratings:
    +11
    Yeah, a 6'6 guy playing NT seems iffy. Not sure how he would be able to get leverage on those linemen in the run game. Although, I do believe there is currently a 6'5 or 6'6 nose tackle who was starting for someone this year. His name completely escapes me at the moment, but from all accounts he wasn't a major liability.
     
  21. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,514
    Ratings:
    +2,437
    He would for sure not play NT in a 3-4 defense.
     
  22. GreenDeath

    GreenDeath Canuck

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Ratings:
    +11
    Geno Atkins would need to put on another 25-30 pounds to potentially be a nose tackle. He's just wayyyy too small at this stage. Donald as well, he's only 288 pounds. They are prototypical 3 techniques. Just stand a guy like Vince Wilfork beside Geno Atkins and you'll see the difference.
     
  23. packfan1

    packfan1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2014
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +17
    These players mentioned are not bad players. Neal had 5 sacks first year at OLB. Hope he is resigned. Perry showed he is better at ROLB and made a few impact plays. Raji has talent no question...for whatever reason he didn't have the stats. He had flashes here and there and I would agree that he didn't show up a lot of times last season. Burnett needs a counterpart at the other S position...he is a good player and good tackler. He had 96 last year 2nd on the team. Defense has to have 2 VERSATILE safteys though so that the opposing offense doesn't know what each safety is going to do pre-snap. Burnett I'm thinking had to play closer to the LOS due to the undersized Jennings given our run defense struggled some as the DL got nicked up (Jolly-IR and Picketts knee) There's no guarantee with Barr either. Good players-pro bowl players have been found much later in the draft and the more picks you have the better your chances. Drafting that high also means you pay more $ which means less $ for other players we need to sign moving forward. I like your urgency for the team to get better, but IMO we need every pick we get. I would rather take Shazier at 21 in the first. He can run, tackle and cover well and wouldn't cost more than 1 pick. Take Buchannon or the best available at S in the 2nd.
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2014
    • Agree Agree x 1
  24. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,128
    Ratings:
    +4,083
    You don't think you could effectively use a geno on the packers?
     
  25. packfan1

    packfan1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2014
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +17
    Two words: Salary Cap. If you look at the 49ers...yes they have a couple guys they signed free agents that worked out, but the core of their team is through the draft as I see it. Kapernick, Iupati, Davis(RT), Reid, Bowman, Willis, Davis(TE), Crabtree, and Aldon Smith. Not sure but I think Staley and Gore were also drafted. Iupati was a big loss for them -once he exited the Seattle game the 49ers had trouble running the ball. Don't forget we lost by ONLY 3 and Hyde was a fingertip from the INT which would have given us the ball LAST and given us the likely win. We held them to 23 points and that loss was more on the offense. Although history has shown the way to beat Rodgers is to only rush 4 and play coverageHopefully our OTs getting healthy negates this scheme and gives Rodgers the 1-2 more seconds he needs to find the open WR with 7 in coverage. Also would you rather sign a blockbuster deal with a free agent, or sign Jordy Nelson and Randall Cobb coming up. Not to mention Sam Shields. TT signs free agents when he needs to...not as option #1 as many times you can find people in the draft to fill holes for WAY cheaper...which then allows you to sign the good core players on your OWN team.
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2014

Share This Page