Packers by positions: DBs

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
2,991
Reaction score
231
As much as I think we need a player at ILB, a CB is soooo much more important than an ILB. Unless it's a true 3 down backer (rare), then we're better off putting the money into CB, imo.
And how do we beat a team with a very good running game? Right now we have two corners. I agree we try and get some backup for them and others in the D backfield. But we evidently need both a D lineman and an Inside Linebacker or we will not beat teams with a real good O Line. So my priority is in those two places.
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
6,463
Reaction score
1,450
Location
PENDING
As much as I think we need a player at ILB, a CB is soooo much more important than an ILB. Unless it's a true 3 down backer (rare), then we're better off putting the money into CB, imo.
We have not had a stud ILB in a long time. There seems to be a revitalization of the position in recent years. It is an area of our team that is more often exposed than our secondary.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,307
Reaction score
1,266
Chris Harris is an interesting option. Upon reflecting on your argument, it makes sense. I still think the money is best spent elsewhere, ILB and DE, but there is certainly value there.

I think that LB is easily a higher priority. I would say that corner and DL are on an equal plane with remarkably similar situations (Clark comparable to Alexander, Lowry to King, Lancaster to Sullivan, Keke to Hollman, etc.). The key difference here is that the 3rd corner is a ~75% snap guy, while the 3rd iDL is a ~40% snap guy.
 

GleefulGary

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
4,921
Reaction score
438
We have not had a stud ILB in a long time. There seems to be a revitalization of the position in recent years. It is an area of our team that is more often exposed than our secondary.

And the only way we're going to get a stud one is to trade up. There isn't one available in FA. So what's your point?
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,307
Reaction score
1,266
If you're not singling out one game then I'm not sure how you support the argument. PFF scored Willams at 75 for the season with 57 targets, which syncs pretty closely to my eye test--a good season. pro-football-reference has him down for that same 57 targets and a 79.3 passer rating against. The 57.9% competion percentage for a slot corner is pretty darn good considering the higher number of shorter routes covered vs. a perimeter corner. My eye test is based on what he didn't do--long stretches where his name is not called. That's a good thing for a cornerback.

If you don't like my eye test or those stats, consider the oppositions' opinion. Alexander was targetted nearly twice as much, 98 times by PFF's count, 110 by pro-football-references count. Williams took some 25% few snaps, but he was sitting for base defense run downs. Now, you would expect a perimeter corner covering a lot of #1 and #2 targets to get thrown at more often, but the stats show Williams was not somebody in particular to throw at.

So maybe somebody will pay Williams $6 mil at age 37 for a one year stop-gap just as somebody might pay Matthews that amount to be a pass down specialist. I would pass on Williams nonetheless given what else needs to get done. Better to roll with Sullivan and trust he's not just a zone player, or some player to be named out of the draft, and put the money into the ILB position, Littleton being a guy both you and I favor who would be quite expensive if the Rams choose not to pay him.

As for the playoff debacle, Pettine's approach all year was to shut down the big plays, give up the ground yards, give up the under throws, give up the first downs, but shut them down in the short field and frustrate them with 3 points. The ol' bend-don't-break, which was consistently effective. In the first SF meeting, Garoppolo beat him over the top twice for TDs. This second meeting looked like a doubling down on the season-long approach--they're not going to beat us through the air. Mission accomplished. :eek:

If you're a front 7 player and that is your mandate, and your first step is a pass rush step, you are going to be get beat one-on-one in the run game. Over and over and over again, it would appear.

Just what I said-- that's how it appeared to me when I watched the game. He seemed less inclined than most towards the physicality. Again, not blaming the performance on him more than anyone else out there; I'm merely saying that he looked to me like he was showing his age. Which would not be surprising... he's 36.

All of your statistics argue that Williams had a nice season, which is a point I agree with, as I've said all along.

In the playoff debacle, our defensive front got manhandled and dominated in one on one matchups. People can try to spin that onto Pettine if they want to, but clearly the players were the biggest problem.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,307
Reaction score
1,266
In the midst of the talk of allocating cap space, I thought this might be useful.

According to espn stats & info, the Packers have 28.9M in space to begin the offseason.

Cutting Graham and Taylor, two no brainers, would bring the total to about 41.4.

Cutting Linsley, more of a debatable option, would bring the total to 49.9M.

Let's say they go for all of the above and end up with basically 50M to play with.

The draft class should account for roughly 7.5M of that. So that means 42.5M.

There are six ERFA's that should be tendered simply because an ERFA salary is so cheap: Tonyan, Kumerow, Sullivan, Redmond, Lazard, and Lancaster. The average of their salaries is likely in the neighborhood of 750K, which means that their total cap implication would be roughly 4.5M. That would bring the available cap down to 38M.

Let's also assume that they want to enter the season with at least 2M in space available. That's now 36M.

If they choose to extend Bulaga, then 12M is probably an optimistic estimate. If that were to be his 2020 cap cost, you'd have 24M left to play with in the open market, including any other GB free agents you might want to resign (e.g. Crosby, Goodson, Lewis). Obviously passing on Bulaga would mean a lot more flexibility, but it would also mean a huge hole at a premium position.

That amount's not nothing, but it isn't a ton. They are going to have to be judicious. Another factor is that Clark needs an extension. Whether that extension changes his 2020 cap number, and by how much, would depend on the structure.

It could be worse. The Vikings are in the negative and are going to have to purge starters, while letting others walk, just to get into the black for the offseason.

The Bears are 28th in space and the only ways they have to generate more involve cuting defensive starters (e.g. Hicks, Floyd, Amukamara) or the only part of their offense that's actually been working (Robinson).

The Lions certainly have more to work with than GB does, but they also suck and are cursed so... lipstick on the proverbial pig.
 

GleefulGary

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
4,921
Reaction score
438
There is Murray and Queen in the draft. And there are 3 or 4 ILBs that represent a significant upgrade IMO.

I'm not quite sold that Murray is/will be a stud. Queen is my favorite, but he's raw and while we never know, I think we'd have to trade up to get him.

A significant upgrade, btw, does not equate to a stud ILB. Corey Littleton is a significant upgrade, but he's not a stud. Do I want to pay him $10-12 million a year? That's hard for me to swallow, personally.

I think there are LB's to be found is rounds 2-5 that also would be an upgrade. Malik Harrison. Logan Wilson. Jordyn Brooks.

I just also think our CB depth is overrated here. We could definitely use another guy there.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
In the midst of the talk of allocating cap space, I thought this might be useful.

According to espn stats & info, the Packers have 28.9M in space to begin the offseason.

Cutting Graham and Taylor, two no brainers, would bring the total to about 41.4.

Cutting Linsley, more of a debatable option, would bring the total to 49.9M.

Let's say they go for all of the above and end up with basically 50M to play with.

The draft class should account for roughly 7.5M of that. So that means 42.5M.

There are six ERFA's that should be tendered simply because an ERFA salary is so cheap: Tonyan, Kumerow, Sullivan, Redmond, Lazard, and Lancaster. The average of their salaries is likely in the neighborhood of 750K, which means that their total cap implication would be roughly 4.5M. That would bring the available cap down to 38M.

Let's also assume that they want to enter the season with at least 2M in space available. That's now 36M.

If they choose to extend Bulaga, then 12M is probably an optimistic estimate. If that were to be his 2020 cap cost, you'd have 24M left to play with in the open market, including any other GB free agents you might want to resign (e.g. Crosby, Goodson, Lewis). Obviously passing on Bulaga would mean a lot more flexibility, but it would also mean a huge hole at a premium position.

That amount's not nothing, but it isn't a ton. They are going to have to be judicious. Another factor is that Clark needs an extension. Whether that extension changes his 2020 cap number, and by how much, would depend on the structure.

It could be worse. The Vikings are in the negative and are going to have to purge starters, while letting others walk, just to get into the black for the offseason.

The Bears are 28th in space and the only ways they have to generate more involve cuting defensive starters (e.g. Hicks, Floyd, Amukamara) or the only part of their offense that's actually been working (Robinson).l
The Lions certainly have more to work with than GB does, but they also suck and are cursed so... lipstick on the proverbial pig.
There's a thread dedicated to the topic, not that it matters. Anyway, a few notes:

  • While the draft class cost should be around that $7.5 mil 2020 cap number, that's not the deduction at this juncture. The Packers now have 53 players currently under contract according to both overthecap and spotrac. If one were to assume all 10 draftees make the roster, then 10 players currently counting against the 53 man cap get bumped out of the cap count. The differerence between a 3rd. rounder and the rookie minimum is neglible. For instance, Sternberger's rookie cap cost was $630,000 vs the 53rd. guy on the current totem pole at $510,000. So even if anybody from the 3rd. round down doesn't make the team the end result is nearly the same. The working number for draftee deductions should be something around $2.0 - $2.5 mil for the cost of the first 2 picks over and above the minimum salary guys they bump. You could fine tune that by looking at the cap costs for the guys last year in those slots and add something like 6% for the cap bump.
  • Overthecap ($24 mil) and spotrac ($22 mil) have meaningfully lower starting points than ESPN. Salary data is proprietary. While ESPN Sports and Information's report may be proprietary the source data is not; ESPN has no more access to actual contract data than other sources. They all cobble it together from reports or agents or team leaks or league leaks. That said, I'm disinclined to trust a single quoted number without seeing the detail of how they arrived at it and for comparison to the detailed sources. The ESPN number quoted by Demovsky might be a better number than the others but there is no reason to believe it is. Does that number include the recent incentive bumps for Jones and Williams? Who know?
  • Is the ESPN number for the top 51? That's the number typically cited at this time of year. So, there's a possible $1 mil cap deduction, up in the air absent their details, just to add two minimum salary guys.
  • The 2020 cap is not yet set. There in an announced range. The difference between the high and low is $4.4 mil. Whether you take the high or low number makes a meaningful difference. There will be more clarity when they announce the actual number. Last year it was at the lower end of the range. Is ESPN assuming the high end of the range?
  • You did not account for the practice squad. Last year it was $8,000 per week x 17 weeks x 10 players = $1.36 mil. Maybe closer to $1.45 mil this year.
To paraphrase Everett Dirkson, a million here, a couple million there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money. As we move along assumptions get converted to facts and we get greater clarity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
25,776
Reaction score
1,365
When the Packers bought Tramon's age 35 and 36 seasons, I understood why but it was obviously a risk. It turned out as well as anyone could have expected. But I feel to run it back at 37 would be pushing their luck.

I am definitely not saying that he was somehow *the* problem in that debacle of an NFCCG, but he certainly showed his age nonetheless. I think it would be smarter to find someone younger.

While it might be smarter to find a younger cornerback replacing Tramon it would definitely be more expensive as well.

There are six ERFA's that should be tendered simply because an ERFA salary is so cheap: Tonyan, Kumerow, Sullivan, Redmond, Lazard, and Lancaster. The average of their salaries is likely in the neighborhood of 750K, which means that their total cap implication would be roughly 4.5M. That would bring the available cap down to 38M.

Once again those players would currently replace cheap ones currently counting $510K against the cap for 2020. Therefore the additional cap hit for the six guys you mentioned would be roughly $1.5 million.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
5,595
Reaction score
598
I am in the team of thinking CB is not a priority high up on my list. If forced to rank I'd say it is 5th or 6th in priority...that said glancing a year or two down the road this could be an issue.

Jaire is our future #1 IMO and most would agree worst case he's our #2 no matter what and will receive a second contract.

Chandon Sullivan I think we all are hoping his flashes and potential pan into a trusted #3/#4 type guy.

Tramon ain't got more than 2 more seasons if we resign him at a high level.

JJ...no clue what we got, but time is on his side to know.

Hollman...same as above.


King is the issue of our future however. If you love roller coasters he is your guy. The team is going to have to do one of the following three things:

#1 The Gamble - Pay him now/before middle of the season in 2020 committing to him for the future but easily getting him at less than normal #2 CBs get in the league given his injury history and rise/fall type of performance over the years. IF the organization believes he can be a solid CB for us for another 3-4 years I think you jump at this resign before he plays out of the price....but that is a BIG IF question.

#2 Wait, and PAY - With a capital P in PAY. This version of the story has King play a solid to great 2020 campaign and now we are forced with dishing out top level CB money for him to stay...

#3 Wait and Flip a Coin - This version the 2020 season plays out and King underachieves or just doesn't take another step like you'd hope...or maybe the injury bug hits again. Now the organization will be forced to play the how much is he worth waiting and seeing...or not signing and watching him possibly grow into a #1 or #2 we all "think" he could be elsewhwere...
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
5,595
Reaction score
598
Honestly to be fair our CB situation is like our RB situation...we have a bonafide stud, solid back up(s) and than some upside wildcards....but the future in two years is VERY uncertain. Presently though, we're good....the key is how much money and draft stock do we use to maybe find that future depth or replacements.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
12,755
Reaction score
1,315
what was that other young players name? I think he went to IR before season, but I noticed him in a couple preseason games Ento? not that I'd be banking on him, and I do think we need another DB, but we do have 2-3 young guys that are at least intriguing. It's a nice change from past years, though I said the same about WR this year. had some guys that could actually step up and take advantage and it was a big fat nothing until late in the season lazard showed at least something.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
23,018
Reaction score
2,813
Location
Madison, WI
As much as I think we need a player at ILB, a CB is soooo much more important than an ILB. Unless it's a true 3 down backer (rare), then we're better off putting the money into CB, imo.

While I agree that in the grand scheme of things a CB is more important than an ILB, I respectfully disagree, if you are saying that CB is a bigger need than ILB for the Packers right now.

Pettine's defense mainly got chewed up last year due to what they gave up in the run game and in the short middle of the field. The pass defense was pretty decent. Even when the Packers knew a team was going to run the ball, they couldn't stop them. Having to play DB's at ILB much of the season didn't help either. ILB and I would even say DL are way more of needs than CB is right now. While its nice to have 3 stud CB's, I think with JA, King + Williams or whoever moves up to the 3rd CB is pretty decent.
 

GleefulGary

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
4,921
Reaction score
438
While I agree that in the grand scheme of things a CB is more important than an ILB, I respectfully disagree, if you are saying that CB is a bigger need than ILB for the Packers right now.

Pettine's defense mainly got chewed up last year due to what they gave up in the run game and in the short middle of the field. The pass defense was pretty decent. Even when the Packers knew a team was going to run the ball, they couldn't stop them. Having to play DB's at ILB much of the season didn't help either. ILB and I would even say DL are way more of needs than CB is right now. While its nice to have 3 stud CB's, I think with JA, King + Williams or whoever moves up to the 3rd CB is pretty decent.

Yeah, that's not what I said.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
23,018
Reaction score
2,813
Location
Madison, WI
Ento was just resigned in January. Expect him to battle for a depth spot.

I wouldn't get too excited. Ento was a WR in College. Yup, it worked out for Sam Shields, but I think he is the exception to the norm.

Herb Waters might be available too. Remember, he was another college WR turned CB project for TT and Joe Whitt. Lasted 2 years on the PS and finally released in 2018. He had a stint on Pittsburgh's Practice squad, and then was drafted in the 8th round during phase four in the 2020 XFL draft by the Vipors, released once already, but signed again.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
5,595
Reaction score
598
I wouldn't get too excited. Ento was a WR in College. Yup, it worked out for Sam Shields, but I think he is the exception to the norm.

Herb Waters might be available too. Remember, he was another college WR turned CB project for TT and Joe Whitt. Lasted 2 years on the PS and finally released in 2018. He had a stint on Pittsburgh's Practice squad, and then was drafted in the 8th round during phase four in the 2020 XFL draft by the Vipors, released once already, but signed again.

Not excited just stating depth fight is all we can expect out of him IMO
 

morango

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
151
Reaction score
18
Location
414
And the only way we're going to get a stud one is to trade up. There isn't one available in FA. So what's your point?

This is assuming Kenneth Murray is the only "stud" in the draft at that position.

Malik Harrison will be available in the 2nd...
 

GleefulGary

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
4,921
Reaction score
438
This is assuming Kenneth Murray is the only "stud" in the draft at that position.

Malik Harrison will be available in the 2nd...

In this draft Patrick Queen is the only one I would put in that category.

I like Harrison. I think him, Brooks, and Logan Wilson are good draft options for the Packers.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,307
Reaction score
1,266
In this draft Patrick Queen is the only one I would put in that category.

I like Harrison. I think him, Brooks, and Logan Wilson are good draft options for the Packers.

To clarify, when you say "stud" you're talking about the guys who are good run defenders and can also hold up reliably in coverage.
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
6,463
Reaction score
1,450
Location
PENDING
To clarify, when you say "stud" you're talking about the guys who are good run defenders and can also hold up reliably in coverage.
I would define as an above average player who makes several plays each game and is not a liability in any area.

Make a play is defined as defeating another player to bust up a play, get a sack, TFL, a pass breakup, pick, disrupting a screen, etc.

I think Queen and Murray could both step in and be studs. Maybe not the first few games, but by seasons end, they would be having an impact.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,307
Reaction score
1,266
I would define as an above average player who makes several plays each game and is not a liability in any area.

Make a play is defined as defeating another player to bust up a play, get a sack, TFL, a pass breakup, pick, disrupting a screen, etc.

I think Queen and Murray could both step in and be studs. Maybe not the first few games, but by seasons end, they would be having an impact.

Just to cut through the semantics, the difference here is that Queen projects to be an asset in coverage, and Murray does not.
 

GleefulGary

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
4,921
Reaction score
438
I would define as an above average player who makes several plays each game and is not a liability in any area.

Make a play is defined as defeating another player to bust up a play, get a sack, TFL, a pass breakup, pick, disrupting a screen, etc.

I think Queen and Murray could both step in and be studs. Maybe not the first few games, but by seasons end, they would be having an impact.

For me, an above average player is an above average player. A stud is a tier above that. Just how I view it.

I think Murray is fine, but I'm a little skeptical of him. Queen stands out much more to me.
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
6,463
Reaction score
1,450
Location
PENDING
For me, an above average player is an above average player. A stud is a tier above that. Just how I view it.

I think Murray is fine, but I'm a little skeptical of him. Queen stands out much more to me.
A tier above average tier is what I meant but worded poorly.

Tiers:
Borderline players
Average
Studs
Elite
 
Top