Packers roster analysis, post draft moves/needs?

[OldSchoolSnapper]

He took a massive step backwards last season. He is a large man, just turned 30, and linemen don't get better once they start getting worse. Writing was on the wall for this one as he was an impending FA anyway. Lowry signing an extension - though they aren't the same tech - showed where they are putting the future.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Honestly, I'm kind of happy to see them just finally making these kinds of moves that Ted Thompson didn't.

 

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2019/04/29/silverstein-why-mike-daniels-no-longer-right-fit-packers/3580870002/

 

This highlights why this isn't all that shocking - although at $7.6m, I'm a bit surprised they weren't able to get a 5th rounder or something for him. Guess that number is a bit too high or others have noted the drop off.

[FVBrewerFan]

In today's NFL if you're a defensive player you better be able to either get to the QB or cover. There's players out there who can play a few snaps each game as a run stuffer in short yardage/ goal line for a fraction of that $7.6MM.

[homer]

Must be a cap thing. Sets up Clark for a new deal I'd imagine.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Martinez is an impending FA, Clark is after 2020. It may be freeing up cash to front load an extension for Martinez.

 

But I don't think it was really cap thing. They don't value what Daniels does in this defense as a one-dimensional player and it's a lot of money for a guy you don't think is a cornerstone.

[KeithStone53151]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but can't any excess cap be rolled forward? Which would make frontloading pointless. Simple example, the cap is $100 and you currently have spent $95...you want to extend player X for 3 years $9. What difference would it make to go 5/3/1 to max the cap out? You could instead go 3/3/3 and the $2 would be able to be used the following year. To me, frontloading doesn't make sense from a cap perspective. If that's what a player wants and helps you net a better deal, different story.

[KeithStone53151]

It did seem a bit weird to me that they simply cut Daniels, but I'm sure they know what they are doing. With all the new guys they added on the line, they couldn't keep them all. I felt like maybe he wasn't THAT great last year, and he's getting older. I also seem to recall him getting a number of stupid unsportsmanlike conduct penalties last year.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Well one point of front-loading would be getting the player to sign for potentially less than he might get elsewhere.

[CheezWizHed]

I think there is a limit to what you can carry forward also.

[CheezWizHed]

I think there is a limit to what you can carry forward also.

[FVBrewerFan]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but can't any excess cap be rolled forward? Which would make frontloading pointless. Simple example, the cap is $100 and you currently have spent $95...you want to extend player X for 3 years $9. What difference would it make to go 5/3/1 to max the cap out? You could instead go 3/3/3 and the $2 would be able to be used the following year. To me, frontloading doesn't make sense from a cap perspective. If that's what a player wants and helps you net a better deal, different story.

 

If there's cap space available in the current year, it makes sense to use it right? In your example, you now have created an addl $2 in cap space the following two years. Unless I'm not understanding your question?

[OnTheBlack]

Martinez is an impending FA, Clark is after 2020. It may be freeing up cash to front load an extension for Martinez.

 

But I don't think it was really cap thing. They don't value what Daniels does in this defense as a one-dimensional player and it's a lot of money for a guy you don't think is a cornerstone.

 

 

I disagree. I think it's a cap thing. Clark is going to get a massive contract and they don't have much room left. Daniels had one down year last year and that was because of injury. There was no reason to expect his play wouldn't rebound. They have the depth on the DL that they didn't need him. They wanted to get bigger, they wanted to get more physical and they wanted to get more athletic. Not sure Lowry's the latter, but he's bigger and he can play a 3 technique or a 5.

 

I guess they must feel pretty good about Lancaster though to cut Daniels at this point. I do hope they lock up Clark sooner rather than later. I think with Jarrett getting 4/68, the Packers probably want to get that deal done sooner rather than later. Clark's 23 and every bit as good as Jarrett. Clark would probably be looking at 3 years and at least 45 million with 30 guaranteed....and that'd be a hometown discount.

[OnTheBlack]

It did seem a bit weird to me that they simply cut Daniels, but I'm sure they know what they are doing. With all the new guys they added on the line, they couldn't keep them all. I felt like maybe he wasn't THAT great last year, and he's getting older. I also seem to recall him getting a number of stupid unsportsmanlike conduct penalties last year.

 

 

It helps mitigate the potential future cap hit. You front load the contract, you don't have to pay as big of a signing bonus and if you want to cut a guy in a couple years, you have far less dead cap. This would be ideal with a guy like Martinez who's a good player now, but cannot afford to lose any athletic ability. So you sign him, give him a 10 million dollar signing bonus(For example) and you give him 10 million in the first year. He's paid 20 million over the first two years, the same as what he'd get in a signing bonus(again, just a hypothetical, really have no idea what Blake Martinez is going to get) but you only have half the potential cap hit if he tears an acl and you cut him in year 3.

[OnTheBlack]

I think there is a limit to what you can carry forward also.

 

 

I don't believe there is. However much room you have at the end of the year, you carry it over. There were limits to how you could use that cap space in the past, especially regarding signing players during the season to extensions so you wouldn't have to do so in the future. Now I'm pretty sure it's just you roll over whatever space you had. That's how teams end up with 60 or 70 million in cap space.

[OnTheBlack]

One way that teams can increase their Salary Cap space is by carrying over any unused Cap space from the prior year. Teams must notify the league of the amount they wish to carry over from one year to the next by 14 days before the new league year.

 

This is a new rule that was added to the CBA of 2011. Prior to that teams used “phony” incentives to carry over Cap space from one year to the next. The new CBA did away with the shame process and instituted a more rational, straight-forward process.

 

https://russellstreetreport.com/salarycap/nfl-salary-cap-faqs/

[OnTheBlack]

Ooof, I can't disagree more on Cobb and Matthews. Buh bye. Nothing against them, but just time to turn things over. Cobb is productive when healthy, which he never is. Matthews is still disruptive at times, but just felt like he was never going to used as the supplementary player he is at this point. Every snap they are giving to those two guys while hoping against hope they don't hurt is a snap taken away from someone 10 years younger who needs to be on the field. But I wanted them both cut prior to last season.

 

I have my eyes on Jimmy Graham this year. He was much more productive than most people are giving him credit for. He didn't score, but neither did anybody else. That offense had so many problems it was really hard to single out anyone who didn't have a really good year. I think he's a shell of what he was and his hands were a little stoney at times, but I think he's a dark horse for being a contributor this year.

 

 

For 5 million you wouldn't have wanted to bring back Cobb? Sure, he's injury prone and he's not likely to ever have a 1300 yard season again, but that's a helluva value for Cobb. Wanting them gone when they were grossly overpaid is one thing, but wanting them gone just regardless makes little sense to me. Matthews, I wouldn't pay what the Rams paid, but I'd have tried to bring him back. He's also just 28 years old and only 3 years older than Allison, a guy who's been banged up 2 of the 3 seasons he'd played and who is not nearly as good of a fit in the slot as Cobb.

 

I mean, I love St. Brown and MVS, just their physical attributes, but Cobb was a proven slot receiver and he was probably one of the best bargain signings of the off-season and is a perfect fit in Dallas with that OL, Zeke and Cooper.

 

Matthews I just wanted back because of his versatility and again, not at the price the Rams paid. Not that it's too high, but too high for us for protection at multiple positions.

 

 

But, they're both gone now, as is Mike Daniels and the Packers are doing things differently. I suspect they'll find fewer guys who take hometown discounts, but that's fine. As long as they're aggressive in solving problems like they did on the edge and safety this past off-season.

[OnTheBlack]

Honestly, I'm kind of happy to see them just finally making these kinds of moves that Ted Thompson didn't.

 

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2019/04/29/silverstein-why-mike-daniels-no-longer-right-fit-packers/3580870002/

 

This highlights why this isn't all that shocking - although at $7.6m, I'm a bit surprised they weren't able to get a 5th rounder or something for him. Guess that number is a bit too high or others have noted the drop off.

 

 

I love the move to bigger, more physical defensive players, but not at the DL position. Many of the elite inside pass rushers are shorter guys who know how to use their exceptional leverage and get under the pads of guards and are strong enough to shed or quick enough to disrupt. Out of the top 11 ranked "interior pass rushers," going into this year, you have Jarrett who's ranked above Clark, Geno Atkins, Aaron Donald(obviously), Jurrell Casey...these are all guys who are smaller.

Obviously the JJ Watt body type is preferable, but is the Dean Lowry body type better than Mike Daniels? I don't think so. He's 6'6 but has 30 inch arms. Daniels arms are actually close to average. Not like the monster build of Wilkerson, but not that far off. Couple in the wrestling background(which Clark has as well) and...I think that's a position where shorter guys can thrive. So I hope that wouldn't play into it as much as the depth we have this year. Deon Simon who could surprise, and all the others(Adams, Lowry as everyone mentioned, Keke, Lancaster, Looney...).

 

Anyway, the reason I came back to post yet again in this thread;

 

11. Kenny Clark, Green Bay Packers

Mike Daniels has been the main man in Green Bay's interior defensive line over the last few seasons, but when he missed six games with a foot injury last season, it was up to Clark-the Packers' first-round pick in 2016-to make up the difference. He did so in a season where he had 46 total pressures, six sacks, four quarterback hits, and 36 quarterback hurries. He also amassed 35 tackles, 14 assists, and 35 stops. His numbers would have been even more impressive had Clark not missed the last few game of the season himself with an elbow injury.

 

The 6'3", 314-pound Clark works best out of the nose tackle position, either head over the center or shading between the center and guard. There, he uses his formidable upper-body strength to create a consistent bull-rush, and he also has the quickness and arm moves to rush past blockers. He's also learned to read gaps as a three-tech, giving him the flexibility to work with stunts and games to create additional pressure. With Daniels returning in 2019 along with free-agent signings Preston Smith and Za'Darius Smith and first-round draft pick Rashan Gary, Green Bay's defensive line will be newly formidable-and Clark will be at the epicenter of it.

 

I think we could easily see Clark jump into the top 5 this year at 24 years old...assuming he stays healthy. A lot more talent in the defensive fronts....

 

 

 

I can also absolutely see your point on Thompson sticking with guys too long. But while he usually just didn't cut them. He never really gave guys that 3rd contract with the team. Even when he discussed it, ie, Greg Jennings, it felt more compulsory for the Packers to make an offer that wouldn't be accepted.

 

But to your earlier points, guys like Cobb, Matthews...probably not Daniels heading into last year, but the two that left should have been guys the Packers approached about re-working the contract. At least if they were genuinely interested in doing so. Better to just let a guy walk than to insult them like they did with Jordy. Had they treated Jordy like almost any other Packer player in the past, he'd have probably been more vocal about it and it wouldn't have been a good look for the Packers.

 

Jimmy Graham would probably be the other guy this year along with Daniels but we have very little depth at TE. I really like that Toynan, but he's too raw and is probably at least a year away from being a viable threat in the passing game. Lane Taylor could also end up getting cut if they find that Billy Turner can be a starter(I'm just assuming Jenkins starts as you don't really pick a guard at 44 for depth).

 

Can't really see Crosby being cut or being beat out by Finken(though an old friend coached him in HS and guarantees he's going to!) or Tramon or any other vets.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Ooof, I can't disagree more on Cobb and Matthews. Buh bye. Nothing against them, but just time to turn things over. Cobb is productive when healthy, which he never is. Matthews is still disruptive at times, but just felt like he was never going to used as the supplementary player he is at this point. Every snap they are giving to those two guys while hoping against hope they don't hurt is a snap taken away from someone 10 years younger who needs to be on the field. But I wanted them both cut prior to last season.

 

I have my eyes on Jimmy Graham this year. He was much more productive than most people are giving him credit for. He didn't score, but neither did anybody else. That offense had so many problems it was really hard to single out anyone who didn't have a really good year. I think he's a shell of what he was and his hands were a little stoney at times, but I think he's a dark horse for being a contributor this year.

 

 

For 5 million you wouldn't have wanted to bring back Cobb? Sure, he's injury prone and he's not likely to ever have a 1300 yard season again, but that's a helluva value for Cobb. Wanting them gone when they were grossly overpaid is one thing, but wanting them gone just regardless makes little sense to me. Matthews, I wouldn't pay what the Rams paid, but I'd have tried to bring him back. He's also just 28 years old and only 3 years older than Allison, a guy who's been banged up 2 of the 3 seasons he'd played and who is not nearly as good of a fit in the slot as Cobb.

 

I mean, I love St. Brown and MVS, just their physical attributes, but Cobb was a proven slot receiver and he was probably one of the best bargain signings of the off-season and is a perfect fit in Dallas with that OL, Zeke and Cooper.

 

Matthews I just wanted back because of his versatility and again, not at the price the Rams paid. Not that it's too high, but too high for us for protection at multiple positions.

 

 

But, they're both gone now, as is Mike Daniels and the Packers are doing things differently. I suspect they'll find fewer guys who take hometown discounts, but that's fine. As long as they're aggressive in solving problems like they did on the edge and safety this past off-season.

 

No, I wouldn't. They plateaued long ago and I would rather see kids on the field. Adams plus the rest of the guys who have a couple seasons under the belt should be the crew now. Cobb misses time every year or plays badly banged up. He's a great guy, nice rapport with Rodgers on busted plays, but was the poster child for time to move on. Matthews is the same. They both might still be decent players but I'd rather someone else roll that dice.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Ooof, I can't disagree more on Cobb and Matthews. Buh bye. Nothing against them, but just time to turn things over. Cobb is productive when healthy, which he never is. Matthews is still disruptive at times, but just felt like he was never going to used as the supplementary player he is at this point. Every snap they are giving to those two guys while hoping against hope they don't hurt is a snap taken away from someone 10 years younger who needs to be on the field. But I wanted them both cut prior to last season.

 

I have my eyes on Jimmy Graham this year. He was much more productive than most people are giving him credit for. He didn't score, but neither did anybody else. That offense had so many problems it was really hard to single out anyone who didn't have a really good year. I think he's a shell of what he was and his hands were a little stoney at times, but I think he's a dark horse for being a contributor this year.

 

 

For 5 million you wouldn't have wanted to bring back Cobb? Sure, he's injury prone and he's not likely to ever have a 1300 yard season again, but that's a helluva value for Cobb. Wanting them gone when they were grossly overpaid is one thing, but wanting them gone just regardless makes little sense to me. Matthews, I wouldn't pay what the Rams paid, but I'd have tried to bring him back. He's also just 28 years old and only 3 years older than Allison, a guy who's been banged up 2 of the 3 seasons he'd played and who is not nearly as good of a fit in the slot as Cobb.

 

I mean, I love St. Brown and MVS, just their physical attributes, but Cobb was a proven slot receiver and he was probably one of the best bargain signings of the off-season and is a perfect fit in Dallas with that OL, Zeke and Cooper.

 

Matthews I just wanted back because of his versatility and again, not at the price the Rams paid. Not that it's too high, but too high for us for protection at multiple positions.

 

 

But, they're both gone now, as is Mike Daniels and the Packers are doing things differently. I suspect they'll find fewer guys who take hometown discounts, but that's fine. As long as they're aggressive in solving problems like they did on the edge and safety this past off-season.

 

No, I wouldn't. They plateaued long ago and I would rather see kids on the field. Adams plus the rest of the guys who have a couple seasons under the belt should be the crew now. Cobb misses time every year or plays badly banged up. He's a great guy, nice rapport with Rodgers on busted plays, but was the poster child for time to move on. Matthews is the same. They both might still be decent players but I'd rather someone else roll that dice.

 

Plus if Cobb were on the team, he'd be Rodgers' security blanket. Getting rid of him (and Nelson last year) forces Rodgers to depend on the young up-and-comers instead of giving those guys the cold shoulder in favor of the guys he trusts more or is more familiar with. You saw it last year as his trust in Valdes-Scantling improved, he began looking his way more. Valdes-Scantling likely wouldn't have had much playing time at all if Nelson were back and Cobb and Allison weren't hurt last year. Now he's a prime break-out candidate, and could turn out to be the game-breaker type this team has been searching for for years.

[Outlander]

You don't see a lot of front loading of contracts in the NFL, it is pretty much always a large signing bonus and that is spread over the life of the contract for cap purposes. I think Daniels simply isn't worth the 8 million so they they cut him and will just carry forward that amount if not used this year. Since they did this for Daniels then I wish they would have done the same with Graham when they had the chance earlier in the year but whatever.

[LouisEly]

Honestly, I'm kind of happy to see them just finally making these kinds of moves that Ted Thompson didn't.

 

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2019/04/29/silverstein-why-mike-daniels-no-longer-right-fit-packers/3580870002/

 

This highlights why this isn't all that shocking - although at $7.6m, I'm a bit surprised they weren't able to get a 5th rounder or something for him. Guess that number is a bit too high or others have noted the drop off.

There were no takers for Gerald McCoy, so it's not surprising that there were no takers for Daniels at that salary, especially coming off of injury.

 

Daniels is no longer viewed as an every down player, more of a 3rd down inside pass rusher, and while that is valuable they have the Smiths and Gary as options to move inside next to Clark on 3rd down.

[KeithStone53151]

Plus if Cobb were on the team, he'd be Rodgers' security blanket. Getting rid of him (and Nelson last year) forces Rodgers to depend on the young up-and-comers instead of giving those guys the cold shoulder in favor of the guys he trusts more or is more familiar with. You saw it last year as his trust in Valdes-Scantling improved, he began looking his way more. Valdes-Scantling likely wouldn't have had much playing time at all if Nelson were back and Cobb and Allison weren't hurt last year. Now he's a prime break-out candidate, and could turn out to be the game-breaker type this team has been searching for for years.

 

I agree with this alot, you don't want to make it too easy for Rodgers to stick with guys that are aging, familiar, and simply not as talented/explosive as the young talent. Gaining trust in the younger receivers is going to be critical to our success this year.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

You don't see a lot of front loading of contracts in the NFL, it is pretty much always a large signing bonus and that is spread over the life of the contract for cap purposes. I think Daniels simply isn't worth the 8 million so they they cut him and will just carry forward that amount if not used this year. Since they did this for Daniels then I wish they would have done the same with Graham when they had the chance earlier in the year but whatever.

 

That's what I believe. I don't think they value Daniels skill set at all. He is the only bulky stout DL they have, something they are moving away from. They could have kept him if they wanted to.

 

Graham is different. They have nothing at TE, plus, he really wasn't a bad player. Factoring in how bad the entire offense was last year, he put together a nice season. I'm not saying he's the same guy he was 5 years ago, but I still think he's productive. I have no issue with him being on the team. And I think he's a sleeper candidate for a pretty good year. If the offense is back to where Rodgers can be, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see 10 TDs. All they need him to be is a RZ guy.

[OldHeidelberg]

It's likely cap related even if it isn't about this years cap, they will almost certainly be keeping someone less talented at the back of the DL pecking order this season. But he always seemed to have a couple of DPOY caliber games and then disappear for a month or so, at least as far as big plays. You can say that about a lot of players but that is what kept him below pro bowl level IMO. I am OK with it, we need a roster overhaul and with the FA splurge this offseason tough choices had to be made. Graham just seems more needed to me, other than the rookie we have nothing behind him and his bonus came before the draft. Probably should prepare for a rough start to the season but I am still optimistic.

[LouisEly]

With the significant raises that the Smiths, Adams, Rodgers, Clark, Turner, and others are due, you can almost guarantee that Graham gets cut after the season to free up $8M in space. Right now the Packers are at $190M for 2020. Probably a safe bet that Lane Taylor gets cut too ($4.55 cap savings). Would not be surprised if Linsley gets cut ($8M in cap space), which could explain the drafting of Jenkins.