VERY Early Stab At Predicting the 2021 53 Man Roster

[Dantés]

Eh I kinda felt this way before the Jets game personally, but to be fair I think I was irrationally high on him. I could still be for sure, but if he does well over the next two and we don't plan on keeping him it would be an entire misjudgement IMO of management to not minimum get a dice roll player back for him at another position.

The player you get back would have to be someone who the FO likes enough to put on the 53, or else what's the point?

 

[tynimiller]

The player you get back would have to be someone who the FO likes enough to put on the 53, or else what's the point?

You wouldn't be able to place on PS? Timing wise it would be possible you use a 53 spot depending on another players designation or injury status to return, then roll dice on the person clearing waivers and PS

This trade scenario is not for a starting level guy, it is depth/future build dice roll type guy. You get a maybe instead of a certain nothing.

 

[thisisnate]

Not sure if it was mentioned already, but Kamal Martin is gone now, so cross him off your lists.

 

[Firethorn1001]

Not sure if it was mentioned already, but Kamal Martin is gone now, so cross him off your lists.

Surprising.

Aaron must have said something positive about him in the last 24 hours.

 

[Dantés]

You wouldn't be able to place on PS? Timing wise it would be possible you use a 53 spot depending on another players designation or injury status to return, then roll dice on the person clearing waivers and PS

This trade scenario is not for a starting level guy, it is depth/future build dice roll type guy. You get a maybe instead of a certain nothing.

Well in order for the acquired player to be placed on the practice squad, he would have to clear waivers regardless.

 

[tynimiller]

Kamal release/cut is surprising to me but Burks has to be ecstatic and really Summers and/or McDuffie as well. I’m unsure if we keep 5, and I only have Barnes and Campbell as the locks….this final preseason game will be massive for two of the remaining three as I predict we keep four.

 

[tynimiller]

Well in order for the acquired player to be placed on the practice squad, he would have to clear waivers regardless.

I know

 

[gopkrs]

Not sure if it was mentioned already, but Kamal Martin is gone now, so cross him off your lists.

could have something to do with Burks looking good. I hope it does.

 

[mradtke66]

If moving forward with just 2 QBs, shoot I'd be willing to even move him to a team for a conditional 7th

The problem with this is most GMs know we're going to move on from him.

Yeah, he's shown good stuff as the no 3, but he'd likely be someone else's no.3 as well. Most GMs would likely call your bluff, put in a waver claim, and not cry about it if they miss out.

If he clears wavers, we could still lose him to someone offering him a PS spot with an increased salary.

 

[tynimiller]

I think you guys are grossly misunderstanding the level of player I want or would expect to pull in return. This is very much a Jackson type trade, and most likely a PS player to clear waivers (more expected to do so then Benkert)....but alas my energy to express and discuss this is lost at this point.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

The problem with this is most GMs know we're going to move on from him.

Yeah, he's shown good stuff as the no 3, but he'd likely be someone else's no.3 as well. Most GMs would likely call your bluff, put in a waver claim, and not cry about it if they miss out.

If he clears wavers, we could still lose him to someone offering him a PS spot with an increased salary.

It kind of depends. I wouldn't be too sure that other teams out there like the Detroit Lions wouldn't be desperate enough to get a backup at #2 (for the record I just saw they had Boyle on their roster backing up Goff which says a lot), and if they had an extra LB or P who they would have kept but just didn't have enough room for, it could be a piece we could use on our 53.

To be clear, as tynimiller has said, I don't want to go this route. I think we should go 3 QBs and figure out where to prioritize or shorten at other positions of depth. But if for whatever reason our HC and GM think we gotta roll with only two QBs, might as well fish him out there and see if you can get at least a nickel for him before you take your chances on trying to keep him on the practice squad.

Now, if we do go with 3 QBs, we'll have to figure out what the future will be for some players like Funchess and Sternberger.

Here's how it might go ...

3 QB - Rodgers, Love, Benkert
3 RB - Jones, Dillon, Hill
6/7 WR - Adams, Cobb, MVS, Lazard, Rodgers, Taylor, *Funchess
3/4 TE - Tonyan, Lewis, Deguara, *Sternberger
9/10 OL - Myers, Jenkins, Turner, Newman, Patrick, Kelly, Braden, *Bakh (pending his return), Nijman, Runyan

5/6 DL - Clark, Lowry, Slaton, Keke, Lancaster, *Heflin
3/4 OLB - Z Smith, P Smith, Gary, *Garvin
4 ILB - Burks, Barnes, Summers, Campbell
6 CB - King, Alexander, Stokes, Sullivan, SJC, Ento
4/5 S - Amos, Savage, Scott, Gaines, *Black

LS - Bradley
K - Crosby
P - whoever

Possibility of Bakh returning late season complicates things a little, but there are options.

Where things are really interesting right now is how Malik Taylor has come on making a strong case to be pushing for the 53, possibly even challenging one of our number 3 or 4 guys. At the same time Funchess did well in his preseason action. My gut says trade him because he's already crowded out with Cobb back to go with MVS and Laz, he would be more expensive to sign again next season, and Taylor's almost as big and probably faster than him.

Then to the TEs, I think we could easily get by with just 3, but over the last few years the GM seems to insist on 4 as ridiculous as it is. Now, personally I have nothing against Sternberger and think he may be the most athletic TE here, but if he's on the bubble anyway and the coaches aren't high on him, then trade him because you definitely know he's going to net something good. Do that and then sign Kafusi to the PR and protect him in case one of our starting TEs goes down.

From there... guess it's just a matter of should you have 5 or 6 defensive linemen? 3 or 4 pass rush LBs? And 4 or 5 safeties?

 

[mradtke66]

To be clear, as tynimiller has said, I don't want to go this route. I think we should go 3 QBs and figure out where to prioritize or shorten at other positions of depth.

I guess I don't see this as a concern. I like the kid, but I don't think he's that good. Ideally, he's inactive the entire year vs. a backup TE or LB that could play special teams.

But if for whatever reason our HC and GM think we gotta roll with only two QBs, might as well fish him out there and see if you can get at least a nickel for him before you take your chances on trying to keep him on the practice squad.

This is where I think the plan falls down. I don't see anyone offering anything in trade. We're going to keep him until final cutdowns and his value for other teams goes down. He didn't do training camp with these other teams. He doesn't know their system.

Anything can happy and I hate big, bold statements, but I cannot see anyone trading for him. Not even a conditional 7th. They (other GMs) will just wait for him to be cut and put in a waiver claim.

Then to the TEs, I think we could easily get by with just 3, but over the last few years the GM seems to insist on 4 as ridiculous as it is. Now, personally I have nothing against Sternberger and think he may be the most athletic TE here, but if he's on the bubble anyway and the coaches aren't high on him, then trade him because you definitely know he's going to net something good.

Ah, but Sternberger is a special kind of safe.

As he is suspended for 2 games, he's effectively the 54th player on the roster. You get him for free.

To leverage this,

Option 1: identify someone who is more likely to be snagged onto a different practice squad. Keep them on the 53. Cut them after week 2 when Stern is ready to come of suspension. Hopefully the other 31 teams like their PS as-is and you sneak him by.

Option 2: Identify someone who is hurt now and could benefit from be a short term IR. Wait for week 2, IR them, bring back Stern. Since this person made the initial 53, he can be reactivated.

Option 3: Similar, wait for someone to get hurt in the first two games.

Option 4: Keep him and then cut him after 2 weeks if 1/3 doesn't end up happening.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

I guess I don't see this as a concern. I like the kid, but I don't think he's that good. Ideally, he's inactive the entire year vs. a backup TE or LB that could play special teams.



This is where I think the plan falls down. I don't see anyone offering anything in trade. We're going to keep him until final cutdowns and his value for other teams goes down. He didn't do training camp with these other teams. He doesn't know their system.

Anything can happy and I hate big, bold statements, but I cannot see anyone trading for him. Not even a conditional 7th. They (other GMs) will just wait for him to be cut and put in a waiver claim.



Ah, but Sternberger is a special kind of safe.

As he is suspended for 2 games, he's effectively the 54th player on the roster. You get him for free.

To leverage this,

Option 1: identify someone who is more likely to be snagged onto a different practice squad. Keep them on the 53. Cut them after week 2 when Stern is ready to come of suspension. Hopefully the other 31 teams like their PS as-is and you sneak him by.

Option 2: Identify someone who is hurt now and could benefit from be a short term IR. Wait for week 2, IR them, bring back Stern. Since this person made the initial 53, he can be reactivated.

Option 3: Similar, wait for someone to get hurt in the first two games.

Option 4: Keep him and then cut him after 2 weeks if 1/3 doesn't end up happening.

1. Maybe, but I put way more value on the potential for a QB who could be a solid backup in the coming years than those. I mean, in the short term, yeah the chances of both Rodgers and Love going down in the same year is very slim, but certainly not impossible as some recent 49er teams have proved with both Garrapolo and Bethard going down. And, we don't know if Rodgers will be back next year, and in the event Love takes over soon, I'd prefer having a guy like Benkert to back him up if he either gets hurt or struggles vs some other bum out there. Competent backup QBs come with a price if they're known veterans, and are difficult to find if you draft late rounders.

2. Well did you see anyone offering anything for Hollman like the Texans just did? If even he's getting picked up, than ya damn skippy someone would offer something for Benkert especially with a shortage of available competent backups in the market.

3. Everything in that last bolded part is completely ridiculous and a waste of time. If you want him, keep him and activate someone else from our practice squad week 1 either at TE or another position while he serves his suspension. Otherwise, trade him outta here and just roll with 3. Most teams do anyway so ... screw it.

 

[mradtke66]

3. Everything in that last bolded part is completely ridiculous and a waste of time. If you want him, keep him and activate someone else from our practice squad week 1 either at TE or another position while he serves his suspension. Otherwise, trade him outta here and just roll with 3. Most teams do anyway so ... screw it.

You’re thinking small.

We don’t have to do anything with Sternberger, which is the whole point. He’s suspended 2 games. We retain his rights, but he doesn’t count against the 53.

He’s a free play/player. You get 2 extra weeks to consider what to do with him, evaluate another player, etc.

Yes, he could end up cut anyway at the end of those 2 weeks, but to not play the hand you’ve been dealt to the fullest ability is stupid.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

You’re thinking small.

Yes, he could end up cut anyway at the end of those 2 weeks, but to not play the hand you’ve been dealt to the fullest ability is stupid.

No, trading him before the season starts gives you max value on him. Not small at all.

 

[mradtke66]

No, trading him before the season starts gives you max value on him. Not small at all.

Ah the problem with being a football fan—under and over valuing your team’s players. Sometimes both at the same time.

OVER: I don’t think Benkert is all that special or rare. I’m happy to be wrong someday, but I just don’t see it. What I do see is a journeyman camp arm. He’s played through enough pre seasons that he looks better than rookies and other fringe players.

BOTH: You seem to think Sternberger isn’t very good, yet we’ll some how get another team to give us value for him? As a player, he’s the most valuable to us. I can’t see a TE going to a new team and succeeding without practice and/or training camp. As a roster pawn, he’s equally valuable to any team, but only if they are considering keeping him around.

Even still, if trading him is the best outcome, keep him for his 2 week suspension. Trade him when he’s eligible to return.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Ah the problem with being a football fan—under and over valuing your team’s players. Sometimes both at the same time.

OVER: I don’t think Benkert is all that special or rare. I’m happy to be wrong someday, but I just don’t see it. What I do see is a journeyman camp arm. He’s played through enough pre seasons that he looks better than rookies and other fringe players.

BOTH: You seem to think Sternberger isn’t very good, yet we’ll some how get another team to give us value for him? As a player, he’s the most valuable to us. I can’t see a TE going to a new team and succeeding without practice and/or training camp. As a roster pawn, he’s equally valuable to any team, but only if they are considering keeping him around.

Even still, if trading him is the best outcome, keep him for his 2 week suspension. Trade him when he’s eligible to return.

Well then you you must not be paying real close attention because it happens a lot in this league, especially in Tampa Bay.

And ... well I'll say wait till after Buffalo this Saturday. Big game there and pull the trigger immediately while he's a hot commodity instead of getting him cold on the bench. Maximum value guaranteed plus there'll be two weeks for his new team to acclimate him before season starts.

 

[mradtke66]

Well then you you must not be paying real close attention because it happens a lot in this league, especially in Tampa Bay.

To be clear:

You are drawing a parallel between an 8 year veteran TE with 5 pro-bowls, 4x First Team All Pros, AND who has history and chemistry with the First Ballot HOF QB that already is playing in Tampa....to Jace Sternberger? A 3rd year player who you has missed more games due to injury than he has played? A player you previously suggested trading at final cutdowns to maximize his value?

That is your snappy comback?

 

[Mondio]

I don’t see a very high max value so it’s not really going to go down if you wait at this point

 

[RicFlairoftheNFL]

I love my inside linebackers but I don't think we keep 5. I do think Campbell and Barnes are your starters week 1, after that I think one of Burks, Martin or Summers gets cut. For me I cut the vet, cause Summers and Martin are young enough they can still learn.

WELP I got this wrong

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Neither option would cut it for me. Well, I mean if they were willing to trade out a punter who could boot that thing 60 or 70 yards consistently, or another edge rusher to compliment the Smiths and Gary in exchange for Benkert, I'd certainly have to consider it.

It's unrealistic to expect that Benkert would net an edge rusher capable of complimenting the Smiths and Gary in a trade solely based on a good game in the preseason.

If he clears wavers, we could still lose him to someone offering him a PS spot with an increased salary.

The Packers could protect Benkert from signing with another team once he has cleared waivers and signed to the practice squad though.

No, trading him before the season starts gives you max value on him. Not small at all.

I don't believe any team would be interested in giving up a lot to acquire Sternberger in a trade.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

This I can agree with. I thought he was almost throw for throw equal to the #2 pick in the draft. Give him the starters and time with them in camp and he'd be right there. The last game gave him at least a little bit of trade value. Maybe for a punter or long snapper that lost the camp battle or a conditional 6/7.

The Packers could most likely claim a punter or long snapper cut via waivers instead of trading Benkert for him. On the other hand I don't expect any team to give up a late rounder for him in a trade.

 

[tynimiller]

The Packers could most likely claim a punter or long snapper cut via waivers instead of trading Benkert for him. On the other hand I don't expect any team to give up a late rounder for him in a trade.

Did you honestly for Hollman?

 

[mradtke66]

The Packers could protect Benkert from signing with another team once he has cleared waivers and signed to the practice squad though.

Yes, but he doesn't have to sign with our practice squad, which was the point I was trying to make (admittedly a little dense.)

After we cut him, assuming he clears wavers, he's free to sign with anyone's practice squad (I know you know this, clarifying in case anyone is following along.)

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

It's unrealistic to expect that Benkert would net an edge rusher capable of complimenting the Smiths and Gary in a trade solely based on a good game in the preseason.


The Packers could protect Benkert from signing with another team once he has cleared waivers and signed to the practice squad though.


I don't believe any team would be interested in giving up a lot to acquire Sternberger in a trade.

Pretty sure we could pull a 4th rounder from the Cowboys as Sternberger is way better than any TE they currently have on their roster. Trust me, old Jerry is getting very senile down there and has never shied away from opening up the bank all the way.

I'm willing to bet 500 grand we could fleece old Jerry down there with a 4th rounder at minimum for Sternberger and Mike McCarthy would also be all in on it.