Pack and BJ close to1 year deal

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,279
Reaction score
2,395
Location
PENDING
Outside FAs carry greater risk than internal signings. You have a guy since a rookie you are in a much better position to judge his heart and attitude. Nobody knows for sure how that first lucrative big contract is going to affect a guy. A FA from another team is a much riskier unknown. I recall many on this forum questioning the resigning of Jones, an average guy. The very next season he was a league leader in TD receptions. Players can still improve and take a step after their rookie contracts expire.

It has become very fashionable for some folks to say that TT is poor at drafting defensive players. I don't agree with this. If you know football, judge talent, evaluate heart/intelligence/etc it doesn't matter so much which side of the ball they are on. True, he has had more success on offense so far, but that is only a coincidence and should even out over time.
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
No, if you re-read what I wrote it's that he's put himself into that box of rarely using FA. It's a three-legged stool: 1) Draft 2) Free Agency 3) Player Retention. Those are your only three tools as a GM. He mostly stayed away from FA so you are only left with the other two tools. You characterized that as settling for mediocrity. While most here agree, including myself, that more use of FA could lead to better results - that's not how TT is doing it. He's not settling, he's just not using all of his tools, for reasons that should/could be debated on a separate thread.

All of this is to say that re-signing Raji for a short deal is one of his few remaining options if he doesn't like any of his choices in the FA market and will continue to look for better players in the draft. He could of course force Capers to start the rookie that he takes this season, but I doubt that's a position any of us would advocate.

There's actually a 4th (trades) which is rarely used, outside of shuffling draft picks.

That aside, I guess I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. You agree that the use of more FA could lead to better results and TT is not using them. To me, that IS settling for what you have. You've got only one avenue for external improvement then, that's the draft. And to be frank, while I prefer the draft myself, it's usually not an instant gratification process. Sure you get lucky from time to time with Clay Matthews or Eddie Lacy, but most of the time it doesn't work out that way.

We are not going to improve our team enough in one off-season to be Super Bowl contenders next year if we don't utilize free agency, barring a bizarre set of almost perfect circumstances (Perry and Datone take huge leaps, Hyde, Hayward, House emerge, Burnett returns to form, we stay healthy, etc. etc). That's my point.. I know what TT's approach is. I'm saying for this offseason in particular, it's not a sufficient one. Some positions are quite deep in free agency this year and there will be bargains to be had.

As far as your last sentence, I would not have a problem with Boyd receiving more opportunities this season, although I know you were referring to a knew draft pick. I can live with the fact that we are hoping to strike it rich on Raji in 2014 banking on the fact that 1) he will benefit from a move back to NT, and 2), he has a lot more talent than he showed. Frankly, he's' probably the kind of guy we WOULD go after in free agency.

I'm just wary because Raji was THAT bad last year. If you have the option, go back and just watch a few plays. He was rarely, rarely doubled. He couldn't shed a block to save his life. He was a complete non-factor almost the entire season. It's hard for me to believe that changing positions is going to magically fix all that.

I'm hoping his own effort WILL lead to fixing it -- but it will definitely stunt my optimism going into next season if our biggest signing outside of the draft is for an underperforming and underwhelming piece of our own existing defense.
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
Outside FAs carry greater risk than internal signings. You have a guy since a rookie you are in a much better position to judge his heart and attitude. Nobody knows for sure how that first lucrative big contract is going to affect a guy. A FA from another team is a much riskier unknown. I recall many on this forum questioning the resigning of Jones, an average guy. The very next season he was a league leader in TD receptions. Players can still improve and take a step after their rookie contracts expire.

It has become very fashionable for some folks to say that TT is poor at drafting defensive players. I don't agree with this. If you know football, judge talent, evaluate heart/intelligence/etc it doesn't matter so much which side of the ball they are on. True, he has had more success on offense so far, but that is only a coincidence and should even out over time.

I wouldn't say it has become fashionable. There is pretty good statistical evidence to back it up.

http://www.packerforum.com/threads/good-article-on-thompson.45496/page-2#post-538639
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
Profootballfocus sees it differently,

I was just going by there rankings per position, not sure where they got there comment from. Their rankings are below:

2011 - ranked 88th out of 88 nose tackles
2012 - Ranked 7th out of 34 3-4 defensive ends
 
Last edited:

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
Maybe you're looking at different numbers than I am but here's where Raji was ranked in 2011 & 2012 per PFF:

2011 - ranked 88th out of 88 nose tackles (that's bad)
2012 - Ranked 7th out of 34 3-4 defensive ends (that's good)

Thank you. I've been trying to understand why some people think that it's going to be a sudden return to beast mode if we put Raji back on the nose. He was bad the last time he played there. Really, really bad.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
I haven't read any of the previous ten pages of posts, but in my opinion this is a very good signing. The Packers get a motivated BJ Raji for one-year at $4.5M. That's great value for a starting defensive lineman. Not to mention, the Packers retain his rights for another year. If he kills it this year, the Packers could franchise Raji and trade him or resign him.

I think this deal is ideal for both parties.
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
I haven't read any of the previous ten pages of posts, but in my opinion this is a very good signing. The Packers get a motivated BJ Raji for one-year at $4.5M. That's great value for a starting defensive lineman. Not to mention, the Packers retain his rights for another year. If he kills it this year, the Packers could franchise Raji and trade him or resign him.

I think this deal is ideal for both parties.

He clearly wasn't very motivated last year. Why am I to believe this year will be different?
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
Also, we haven't signed him yet. Unless I've missed something in the last hour or two, from the most recent information we have, I'd say he's maybe around a 50/50 shot to sign a 1 year deal with us before free agency.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
He clearly wasn't very motivated last year. Why am I to believe this year will be different?

I'm assuming this is why he agreed to the 1-year deal. Similar to the Michael Bennett contract last year with Seattle, the player, in this case BJ Raji, gets one year to prove he's worth a big contract.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
Also, we haven't signed him yet. Unless I've missed something in the last hour or two, from the most recent information we have, I'd say he's maybe around a 50/50 shot to sign a 1 year deal with us before free agency.

Per the Green Bay writers for ESPN and Wisconsin Sentinel Journal, the deal could be done as earl as tomorrow morning.
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
Per the Green Bay writers for ESPN and Wisconsin Sentinel Journal, the deal could be done as earl as tomorrow morning.

Could be. Or he could say "nah I've waited this long to be a free agent, I'll see if I can do better than that on the market in a few days, if not I bet the Packers offer will still be there."

Frankly, I don't know why he would sign this now unless his agent has already somehow gauged that he will receive no interest as a free agent and he wants to avoid the embarrassment.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
Could be. Or he could say "nah I've waited this long to be a free agent, I'll see if I can do better than that on the market in a few days, if not I bet the Packers offer will still be there."

Frankly, I don't know why he would sign this now unless his agent has already somehow gauged that he will receive no interest as a free agent and he wants to avoid the embarrassment.

My thought would be that his agent gauged interest and said, "Green Bay's offer of one-year, $4M with incentives up to $6.5 is the best you're going to get... So take it."
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
His agent should be fired if he doesn't have an idea of the FA market for his client yet
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
His agent should be fired if he doesn't have an idea of the FA market for his client yet

Probably should be anyway after advising him to turn down an $8M/year extension that will probably end up being bigger than any contract he gets in his entire career.
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
Probably should be anyway after advising him to turn down an $8M/year extension that will probably end up being bigger than any contract he gets in his entire career.
That "news" was floated by his agent in order to drive up perceived value of his client.
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
Are you speculating on that or is there a link of some evidence of this?
Combo of something I was told and common sense.

Packers don't leak contract talk. Not much gets out of the building. It would do them no good to leak an outrageous offer to a player. So it came from Raji. His team benefits from the perception he turns down a huge offer.

My track record with insider info is pretty solid, the older more frequent posters will vouch for it. I remember my inbox blowing up when I said the packers were planning a stock offering.
 

jaybadger82

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
837
Reaction score
83
Meh. The Packers need for NTs (and, hence, willingness to pay Raji for a year) shouldn't come as a surprise to any front office that has looked at our roster. Sorta cheapens the impact on Raji's perceived value. Front offices aren't that naive.

Most clubs would prefer to draft a NT than pay for one in FA. -Welcome to the new NFL, where the draft-and-develop formula of the Packers and Seahawks has become the preferred model (good article).

I would welcome back Raji on a short deal just for the depth. You hate to enter a draft with a pressing need when you're after the BPA. Glaring holes on the roster color a team's draft evaluations, whether that team would admit it or not.
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
Combo of something I was told and common sense.

Packers don't leak contract talk. Not much gets out of the building. It would do them no good to leak an outrageous offer to a player. So it came from Raji. His team benefits from the perception he turns down a huge offer.

My track record with insider info is pretty solid, the older more frequent posters will vouch for it. I remember my inbox blowing up when I said the packers were planning a stock offering.

I'm not calling you a liar or anything, I was just curious.

However just because Raji's camp may have leaked a high offer doesn't mean it wasn't actually offered at some point.
 

Vltrophy

Full On Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
4,018
Reaction score
186
This could be the Packers telling him this is a do it die yr for him. Which means he'll have a kick *** yr get a sweet deal then likely taper off.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I view this idea with considerable skepticism and will believe it when pen is applied to paper.

The only way this 1 year deal stuff makes any sense is if his agent has been having trouble raising any interest in his dead a*s. If that happens to be the case, a message has been sent that should not have needed to be sent: you can't just go through the motions in a contract year and expect to be paid.

That kind of wake up call could work for us. Besides, we have no big bodies under contract which borders on a "beggars can't be choosers" situation. In any event, 1 year at $4 mil would sure beat the bullet-dodged $8 mil/yr long term deal he turned down.

I'd just as soon see him gone because the way he quit on us has left a very sour taste in my mouth. Maybe Thompson's/McCarthy's/Caper's (whoever might choose to make a case for him) taste buds are less sensitive.
 

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,287
Reaction score
1,700
I view this idea with considerable skepticism and will believe it when pen is applied to paper.

The only way this 1 year deal stuff makes any sense is if his agent has been having trouble raising any interest in his dead a*s. If that happens to be the case, a message has been sent that should not have needed to be sent: you can't just go through the motions in a contract year and expect to be paid.

That kind of wake up call could work for us. Besides, we have no big bodies under contract which borders on a "beggars can't be choosers" situation. In any event, 1 year at $4 mil would sure beat the bullet-dodged $8 mil/yr long term deal he turned down.

I'd just as soon see him gone because the way he quit on us has left a very sour taste in my mouth. Maybe Thompson's/McCarthy's/Caper's (whoever might choose to make a case for him) taste buds are less sensitive.

This is exactly how I feel about it. I'm so suspicious of this guy's consistently inconsistent effort for his entire time here that I think the contract needs to be heavily incentive laden with little to no guarantee money and demand that he stay in Green Bay this summer. The coaching staff needs to put him on a strict weight and training regimen and put him on a 35 snap limit per game. If there going to sign this guy, they need an easy way to get him out of here if he doesn't get his act together. I don't trust this guy t all!
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top