That's why you have to stack drafts within a 4 year period accumulating a critical mass of good-to-great players on cheap rookie contracts to create a window of opportunity. If you do that odds are you will be a legit contender; if you don't then odds are you will not.
You forgot Clark.
Here you have it, from Demovsky:
i didn't say "last shot." i said "best last-shot" and i explained why in the next sentence.
As Ali said, we're back to TTs draft and develop again. Hitting a elite LB in draft with mid/late round picks and hoping they'd do good...so many unpredictable stuff. Is Blake not worth that money? I'd say he's worth every cent.
I think now they focus on locking up Clark for 4 years. Not a bad move. But I liked Daniels. Another one of those business moves you love and hate.
I don’t know that Gluten punted on the season, but he’s betting on the come that the new additions more than compensate for the lack of depth w/o Daniels.
One last shot isn’t the same as “best” last shot”
well it ended in a super bowl win and another team that "should have" before the roster got injured in key areas and followed with poor drafts. If Gute has a decade like Thompson, could probably call it a success. We should be so lucky.
What if Daniels is heavier, slower, weaker and still gimpy from his foot injury? Not something unlikely for an aging big big guy coming off foot injury that put him on IR last year and caused him to miss all the OTA's this year.
I also think Martinez (as most players) would get better with a better Defense around him. I see him as a stellar clean up LB who’s very good at finding the football. As the D-Line improves and the QB gets more pressures (I think we will) I think he’s going to just get that much better. He would be suited perfectly to have a top notch coverage Backer next to him in the middle.
It's not Thompson's draft and develop. It's everybody's draft and develop. It is what you must do. You just have to do it better than Thompson. You've got get more out of the day 1 and day 2 picks than Thompson yielded those past few years.
A heavier, gimpier Daniels is still better than the collection of mediocre trash heap players they have behind him on the depth chart. Adams and Lowry are just camp bodies. They've shown virtually nothing in their time so far. Signing Lowry to big money is especially a head scratcher. He is slow off the ball and blockers get into his body. Has he ever looked explosive? Now Clark can easily get double teamed thwarting what looked like it would be a promising season. Face it, Gute paniced and crapped the bed.
The new additions aren't defensive tackes. Clark and Daniels are the only players they have that can line up over the guard and center. Cutting Daniels blasted a massive hole on the team.
Where is the quality depth on the d line? They have nobody behind Daniels. Adams and Lowry have shown virtually nothing so far. Lowry is slow and weak and while Adams can flash but he also lets himself get turned sideways and takes poor angles to the ball. Neither one can rush the passer or line up over guards and centers. Gute paniced and blasted a massive hole in the team He also may have ruined Clark's season. It will be easy to double team him since the other other defensive tackles are mediocre and can be easily blocked. Let's face it. Gute just punted on the season and admitted he's in rebuilding mode.
"Some"? So you did forget about him, didn't you? Just kidding. Maybe.
A team might be interested in such a trade for a one year rent-a-player with no long term commitment if injuries lead to desperation and they have the available cap space. Oakland signed Nelson to 2 years/$15 million when he was clearly in decline. While that was an FA signing, I would not have expected more than a lower round pick for Daniels, and perhaps a conditional one at that, where the value in trade would be minor. There would have been no additional cost to the Packers in holding out for a desperation offer all the way up to cut downs.
That's what I said, and it is not complicated at all. Your "some" was a misrepresentation, now corrected. Some things are complicated, this isn't one of them.
