Now's as good a time as any to start free agent discussions.

[Packerlifer]

http://wallstcheatsheet.com/sports/...nt-class-may-be-the-best-ever.html/?a=viewall

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I would be fine with the Packers to bring in some second- or third-tier free agents just like Letroy Guion last season but there´s no need to break the bank for other teams FAs as the team has a lot of talent with not a lot of holes. It´s important though to re-sign Cobb and Bulaga.

 

[Bagadeez04]

Wish there was a decent ilb on that list.

 

[adambr2]

Wish there was a decent ilb on that list.

Someone mentioned awhile back that Willis is likely to be a cap casualty in San Francisco with their cap situation and the emergence of Borland. They suggested looking to help both of us by sending a mid to late round pick for Willis.

I really like the thought. Not only does this defense need that interior presence, they need leadership.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Someone mentioned awhile back that Willis is likely to be a cap casualty in San Francisco with their cap situation and the emergence of Borland. They suggested looking to help both of us by sending a mid to late round pick for Willis.

I really like the thought. Not only does this defense need that interior presence, they need leadership.

The only thing is we all know we wont sign free agents that freely.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The only thing is we all know we wont sign free agents that freely.

Well, we would have to trade for Willis. I would do that in a heartbeak considering he would count approximately $7.8 million towards the cap and the Packers could save $7.25 million by releasing Bead Jones and Hawk.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Well, we would have to trade for Willis. I would do that in a heartbeak considering he would count approximately $7.8 million towards the cap and the Packers could save $7.25 million by releasing Bead Jones and Hawk.

They would also have more freedom to potentially let Peppers walk since they could move Matthews to OLB full time if they actually had a decent ILB.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I think the Packers should look at Nick Fairley. The guy is 90% of Suh and will cost a third as much.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

They would also have more freedom to potentially let Peppers walk since they could move Matthews to OLB full time if they actually had a decent ILB.

Why would we let Peppers walk ??? Just interested. He was one of our best players this season.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Why would we let Peppers walk ??? Just interested. He was one of our best players this season.

I'm not saying we should let him walk but his cap number is fairly high. It would just give the Packers the option as well as leverage to maybe get Peppers to take a paycut since you no longer HAVE to put Matthews at ILB.

If the Packers don't get an impact ILB then bring Peppers back at his current salary because the Packers need two decent OLBs outside of Matthews so that Matthews can moonlight at ILB.

 

[adambr2]

Why would we let Peppers walk ??? Just interested. He was one of our best players this season.

Cap hit. I think he'll be back, but I think there may be a restructuring .

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

I'm not saying we should let him walk but his cap number is fairly high. It would just give the Packers the option as well as leverage to maybe get Peppers to take a paycut since you no longer HAVE to put Matthews at ILB.

If the Packers don't get an impact ILB then bring Peppers back at his current salary because the Packers need two decent OLBs outside of Matthews so that Matthews can moonlight at ILB.

Okay. Thanks for clarifying that for me

 

[7thFloorRA]

I think the Packers should look at Nick Fairley. The guy is 90% of Suh and will cost a third as much.

I think the Lions would be insane to let him and Suh go. It seems likely Suh goes and they pay Fairley whatever they have to in order to retain him.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Cap hit. I think he'll be back, but I think there may be a restructuring .

Thanks

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I think the Lions would be insane to let him and Suh go. It seems likely Suh goes and they pay Fairley whatever they have to in order to retain him.

Signing Fairley will pretty much eliminate any chance that they can create the cap room to tag or sign Suh and I don't think the Lions will be willing to do that.

 

[aristotle]

we need some new blood on defense. Let Tramon go and sign Cromartie. Also, go after Julius Thomas at TE, he is a UFA also.

 

[Mondio]

Someone mentioned awhile back that Willis is likely to be a cap casualty in San Francisco with their cap situation and the emergence of Borland. They suggested looking to help both of us by sending a mid to late round pick for Willis.

I really like the thought. Not only does this defense need that interior presence, they need leadership.

I'd like to get Willis and I don't really know San Fran's situation with great detail, but I think they're likely to stick with what they have there. The knock on Borland coming out of college was size, which was dumb, and injuries. He was always dinged up and his shoulders gave him some problems. Not a good injury as a linebacker.

Anyway, Willis was hurt at times, and I think Borland missed some too again because of injury I think even ending on IR. He was everywhere when he was in, but he's on a rookie contract, he's cheap, They already planned on paying Willis his money and with the injury history and the hole it would leave if they got rid of one and the other missed time with injury again probably wouldn't be filled.

I think they go another year with both Borland and Willis before they make any moves in that regard.

 

[HardRightEdge]

They would also have more freedom to potentially let Peppers walk since they could move Matthews to OLB full time if they actually had a decent ILB.

"Let him walk" is an odd way of putting it since he's under contract through 2016. "Fired" would be a more apt term in that context.

While Peppers is on the books for a $12 mil cap hit for next season, there's $5 mil in dead cap for 2015 attached to that deal. So the question becomes whether he's worth a $7 mil net cap hit for 2015. I suppose a renegotiation is possible, but I doubt that will happen. If it does happen, I doubt the difference will be material.

Peppers put $8.5 mil in his pocket in 2014; I'd say the Packers got their money's worth especially given the alternatives. He's due to put $9.5 mil in his pocket for 2015. Is it fair to ask him to take considerably less given his play, his versatility, his durability and evidently his leadership. And wouldn't a minor cut in pay be a slap in the face to a Hall of Fame player who's still performing a fairly high level? You might as well cut him if that's the alternative.

In this patchwork front 7, the fact Peppers played quite decently at OLB, 4-3 hybrid DE, 5-tech DE and 3-tech DT at one time or another may be an under-appreciated aspect of his value in the patchwork context. Further, he looked like same player in week 17 that we saw in week 1 after taking about 80% of the defensive snaps. Another year at that level of play would be a reasonable expectation even if that doesn't quite sync with the Walsh philosophy of cutting guys before they hit the down slope.

When one takes an honest look at the front 7, there's Matthews and Peppers capable of making plays. Daniels is a solid if unspectacular player. Barrington added a needed physical presence in the middle and may have some upside. None of the other guys are 3-down players. Perry remains a mystery; he's shown burst and lean but only about once per season...but that's a topic for another time.

So, if you take Peppers out of the equation that leaves a big hole barring some significant free agent move. Value is not just measured against some theoretical comparison to league levels of play and pay; it is also measured against the question, "if not him then who?"

 

[Sunshinepacker]

"Let him walk" is an odd way of putting it since he's under contract through 2016. "Fired" would be a more apt term in that context.

While Peppers is on the books for a $12 mil cap hit for next season, there's $5 mil in dead cap for 2015 attached to that deal. So the question becomes whether he's worth a $7 mil net cap hit for 2015. I suppose a renegotiation is possible, but I doubt that will happen. If it does happen, I doubt the difference will be material.

Peppers put $8.5 mil in his pocket in 2014; I'd say the Packers got their money's worth especially given the alternatives. He's due to put $9.5 mil in his pocket for 2015. Is it fair to ask him to take considerably less given his play, his versatility, his durability and evidently his leadership. And wouldn't a minor cut in pay be a slap in the face to a Hall of Fame player who's still performing a fairly high level? You might as well cut him if that's the alternative.

In this patchwork front 7, the fact Peppers played quite decently at OLB, 4-3 hybrid DE, 5-tech DE and 3-tech DT at one time or another may be an under-appreciated aspect of his value in the patchwork context. Further, he looked like same player in week 17 that we saw in week 1 after taking about 80% of the defensive snaps. Another year at that level of play would be a reasonable expectation even if that doesn't quite sync with the Walsh philosophy of cutting guys before they hit the down slope.

When one takes an honest look at the front 7, there's Matthews and Peppers capable of making plays. Daniels is a solid if unspectacular player. Barrington added a needed physical presence in the middle and may have some upside. None of the other guys are 3-down players. Perry remains a mystery; he's shown burst and lean but only about once per season...but that's a topic for another time.

So, if you take Peppers out of the equation that leaves a big hole barring some significant free agent move. Value is not just measured against some theoretical comparison to league levels of play and pay; it is also measured against the question, "if not him then who?"

If you read anything into what I wrote that implied I thought the Peppers signing was a bad idea then I should apologize. Nowhere in my post did I say that Peppers wasn't good or that the Packeres shouldn't have signed him. Peppers was terrific this year. I'm really glad that they signed him.

However, if the Packers can get a great ILB on the team that allows Matthews to move back to OLB then the Packers have the OPTION to move on from Peppers. The Packers would have the leverage to try and restructure Peppers' contract to be more cap friendly. Without the ILB then Peppers pretty much knows that the Packers can't afford to let him go.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'd like to get Willis and I don't really know San Fran's situation with great detail, but I think they're likely to stick with what they have there. The knock on Borland coming out of college was size, which was dumb, and injuries. He was always dinged up and his shoulders gave him some problems. Not a good injury as a linebacker.

Anyway, Willis was hurt at times, and I think Borland missed some too again because of injury I think even ending on IR. He was everywhere when he was in, but he's on a rookie contract, he's cheap, They already planned on paying Willis his money and with the injury history and the hole it would leave if they got rid of one and the other missed time with injury again probably wouldn't be filled.

I think they go another year with both Borland and Willis before they make any moves in that regard.

The reason I brought up the Willis idea in the first place some weeks back is because SF is already at $152 mil in cap commitments for next season, not counting what they might do with FAs Gore, Crabtree and Iupati. You'd figure they'd at least want to do something with Iupati in particular. Some heavy trimming will be required:

http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/san-francisco-49ers

If you look at the cap savings column in the above link, there are not lot of candidates for lopping off the minimum $15 mil or so in cap that will likely be needed if the cap comes in $140 mil as many have estimated. Keeping in mind (1) this is a team with aging stars, (2) the QB has regressed and (3) the coaching turnover, you'd figure they're looking to rebuild on the fly.

Stevie Johnson would be the most obvious candidate yielding $6 mil in savings ...they should have never signed him in the first place, but "win now" makes teams do things they should not. One supposes they could cut ties with the off-field-troubled Aldon Smith, but how likely is that given his All Pro performance in 2013 while Justin Smith grows another year older? The only other guy yielding significant cap savings would be Willis at $7.4 million by cut or trade.

Besides Borland being a proven, young and cheap, if unspectacular, replacement for Willis, Bowman will be returning next year, a former All Pro in his own right.

What's also interesting about Willis is that by his own telling he could have played with the foot injury, albeit not up to his standards, but opted for surgery instead in order to, again by his telling, reset the stage for several productive years to come. With the cap commitments for 2015, there was obviously a "win now" approach at work. One can't help but suspect there might have been at least some modest displeasure that Willis opted for priming for 2015 over contributing to the cause.

Anyway, swapping Hawk's and Jones' cap hits for Willis' and maybe a 3rd. round pick would be brilliant if it could get done.

 

[HardRightEdge]

If you read anything into what I wrote that implied I thought the Peppers signing was a bad idea then I should apologize. Nowhere in my post did I say that Peppers wasn't good or that the Packeres shouldn't have signed him. Peppers was terrific this year. I'm really glad that they signed him.

If you read anything into what I wrote suggesting I thought you thought Peppers was a bad signing, I won't apologize because I said nothing of the sort.

 

[OldSchool101]

I agree we need to shore up the "known" playmakers. Particularly Cobb, Bulaga and Peppers. Seems to me we set ourselves up in a reasonable position cap wise and like doing battle in war, we have the enemy on her heel. Indecision could be our worst enemy cap wise and we don't want General Thompson or McCarthy to pick up the old "little Mac" complacency nickname from the Civil War.
Our Defense improved coursing the year, but IMO we are 2-3 solid playmakers away from a Championship caliber D we need for a decisive season. 2 ILB (which would allow completeness at OLB without experimenting in battle) and depth of talent on the Defensive Run front are inadequacies as we have in recent cease fires, went after lighter and taller armored fighting vehicles (pass rush DE) rather than varieties of tanks (NT, DT)
We may now have Raji and Guion who are serviceable but becoming outdated and prone to mechanical failures that accompany age.
I'd go after DT and ILB as if the war depended on it Next, I'd focus on protecting our Now full bird Colonel Rodgers either O-line depth s. Our QB has Been hit with shell frags and could become shell shocked if allowed to take on more during the advance.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I agree we need to shore up the "known" playmakers. Particularly Cobb, Bulaga and Peppers.

It seems like there is a misconception with some posters here that Peppers is a free agent. That's not true as he's under contract through the 2016 season.

Thompson has to figure out if he wants him back for a $12 million cap hit for next season though.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Here's a heretical thought.

Let's suppose nothing is done in free agency with respect to the ILB position.

Then a reasonable conjecture would be the need to draft an ILB in the first or second round to get the kind of 3-down talent that would yield the upgrade needed to get Matthews back at OLB full time. Even then, there would be a heavy burden being placed on said rookie given he'd be playing next to what amounts to a second year player in Barrington who's still learning his job. And if Barrington fails to take a step forward he'd be stuck as an ordinary, if physically needed, player as the rookie's running mate.

So let's say the talent available at #30 includes an OLB with outstanding pass rush potential while the leading ILB candidates have been picked over. Would it be out of the question to keep Matthews in the OLB/ILB swing-man role while beefing up the edge rush talent?

In the past I would have thought "no". In fact, in past discussions noodling over a switch to 4-3, I saw Matthews ill-suited to the DE position and too valuable (and too well paid) to take him out of the edge rush role. Today, given the current composition of the front 7, keeping Matthews in the middle at least part time might be the best way to go. Perry is the bookend who wasn't, leading to the Peppers' signing. Neal's decent, but so often he's a step or half-step short of making the play.

While it's still premature to be thinking about specific draft needs until the fates of Cobb, Bulaga, Williams and House are resolved, I would not rule out an OLB choice over an ILB if the player projection gap is significant enough.

 

[ExpatPacker]

If there is any chance that the Packers could get Patrick Willis from SF, they'd be crazy not to go after him. Maybe not for a 1st round, but I could see the Packers giving up their 2nd round pick for Willis. Not sure that would be enough for SF, but if their salary cap situation is that bad, they may shop him around to see what they can get.

Even if it meant not bringing Peppers back, I'd rather have than Willis than Peppers.