Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
What happen to.........
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 779962"><p>Of course letting those players go were cap decisions. Same with Williams and House before them.</p><p></p><p>There's a point in every offseason where there's a slug of cap avialable that fans are inclined to spend a couple of times over. Here's the bottom line:</p><p></p><p>Cap carryover has been in place since the 2011 carryover to 2012 under the new CBA. That's 7 years of carryover allowed to accumulate if one sees fit. There was $3.9 mil in carryover from 2017-2018.</p><p></p><p>So, that's the amount that could have been spent at some point in the last 7 years that wasn't. That's peanuts. In the multi-year view, Thompson spent up to the cap.</p><p></p><p>So, the question about not signing Hayward and Hyde is one of who would not have been signed in their places. To do that, you have to put your 20-20 hindsight glasses in the bottom drawer. One cannot, for example, forget ones enthusiam for the Bennett signing and say now it was a waste of money.</p><p></p><p>Taking a big picture perspective, "draft and develop" and piling up draft picks in the Thompson approach is a cap philosophy. It requires stacking a couple of drafts with good players under cheap rookie deals, while avoiding the pitfalls of FA where ill-fitting and/or take-the-money-and-tank players are a risk. The FA risk is mitigated by resigning your own core players at or near the top of their auction value where the fit is already established.</p><p></p><p>It comes to down to using 20-20 hindsight in thinking Hayward or Hyde should have been deemed those kinds of core players, but if you're going to do that you have to identify the players that would not have been signed in their places, another hindsight exercise.</p><p></p><p>In the final analysis, Thompson did not stack those drafts <strong><em>and</em></strong> Capers did not maximize what he was given. If Thompson ever acted on Capers' input as to what he needed, that only compounded the problem.</p><p></p><p>In noting both are "gone" with Thompson' consigned to a consultancy and not decision making, one might contemplate that the problem was both, not an either-or.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 779962"] Of course letting those players go were cap decisions. Same with Williams and House before them. There's a point in every offseason where there's a slug of cap avialable that fans are inclined to spend a couple of times over. Here's the bottom line: Cap carryover has been in place since the 2011 carryover to 2012 under the new CBA. That's 7 years of carryover allowed to accumulate if one sees fit. There was $3.9 mil in carryover from 2017-2018. So, that's the amount that could have been spent at some point in the last 7 years that wasn't. That's peanuts. In the multi-year view, Thompson spent up to the cap. So, the question about not signing Hayward and Hyde is one of who would not have been signed in their places. To do that, you have to put your 20-20 hindsight glasses in the bottom drawer. One cannot, for example, forget ones enthusiam for the Bennett signing and say now it was a waste of money. Taking a big picture perspective, "draft and develop" and piling up draft picks in the Thompson approach is a cap philosophy. It requires stacking a couple of drafts with good players under cheap rookie deals, while avoiding the pitfalls of FA where ill-fitting and/or take-the-money-and-tank players are a risk. The FA risk is mitigated by resigning your own core players at or near the top of their auction value where the fit is already established. It comes to down to using 20-20 hindsight in thinking Hayward or Hyde should have been deemed those kinds of core players, but if you're going to do that you have to identify the players that would not have been signed in their places, another hindsight exercise. In the final analysis, Thompson did not stack those drafts [B][I]and[/I][/B] Capers did not maximize what he was given. If Thompson ever acted on Capers' input as to what he needed, that only compounded the problem. In noting both are "gone" with Thompson' consigned to a consultancy and not decision making, one might contemplate that the problem was both, not an either-or. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
tynimiller
Ebonypete
DABIGZ
mradtke66
Latest posts
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
3 minutes ago
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
M
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: mradtke66
10 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
M
Prior to Training Camp - Predicting the 53 Man Roster
Latest: mradtke66
12 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
Valuation of NFL Teams
Latest: rmontro
27 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: rmontro
30 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
What happen to.........
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
