HiAndTight

I forgot that this was another part of the reasoning not to spend too much money to upgrade the DL. I suppose Lowry could be the one to sit, but with Clark about to make big money, Lowry off his rookie contract, and Smith sliding inside, I doubt they put big money there anyway. This really could have been solved if they just would have signed Mike Pennel when they brought him in last year. Pennel is the perfect example of how you can get one dimensional 34 run stuffer cheap. He's very good at what he does and yet he was available mid-way through the season last year.

Pretty much everything the "pundits" were talking about LeBron needing to do in order to win the MVP has happened over the last week. If the Lakers can win and LeBron plays well vs the Bucks and Clippers IF the Lakers finish with a comprable record to the Bucks, IF Giannis misses some time. I'd bet if they voted on MVP right now it'd be an extremely close race. A toss up. As if the other 60 games this year are less important than the past 4-5.

You're talking about asking Kenny Clark to go from playing over the center to over the guard or over the guard's outside shoulder. This isn't a dramatic move and it's one he'd likely only play a limited number of snaps a game as we're not in our base defense very often. I mean...if he'd been drafted by the Seahawks or the Lions...this is what he'd be playing essentially. As for the guys you listed, both Hargrave and Williams would be great. But Hargrave, he's pretty much exclusively played DT...and he's a stud. He's looking at a contract in the neighborhood of what Kenny Clark is going to get. Leonard Williams is the perfect option, but he's also going to get a big deal. Spotrac has him getting ~5/45 this year. I'd definitely rather see the Packers do that than spend the money on Corey Littleon for example, but I don't think they're looking to break the bank on a DL right before they lock up Clark long term. I agree that there are good option at DE, but they are generally more expensive options and in this hypothetical, the idea was to save money and get a bigger, more physical run stuffer out there. If we DO want to go cheap and want to keep Clark at NT, I'd like to see them try and bring in Vernon Butler in. A former 1st rounder who hadn't had much success until the last year. He's a big body who can play the run and rush the QB and due to Short and Poe playing in Carolina, he's played mostly at both DE spots.

I don't know if it'd work out or not, but I don't think you can look at what happened with BJ Raji nearly a decade ago as any type of indication how Kenny Clark would do. Just for starters, they are very different schemes. Pettine lets his DL get upfield and disrupt and Capers could get by with Howard Green(who was pretty much the prototypical NT) at end because he just wanted guys who could eat up blockers and space. And of course Clark and Raji are very different guys. Clark's a bigger, longer guy who should be better suited to play end than Raji was. But really, his "natural" position is literally just a few feet over one way or the other. We're not talking about moving Ty Montgomery from WR'er to RB. We're talking about moving an interior DL to another interior DL spot. It certainly could backfire, he struggled when they played him at end more often this past year...but he was also banged up and struggling in general at that time.

It isn't really surprising, though. He's at the age where the Packers typically let free agent OL walk. That practice has pretty much always been a good plan, too. When was the last time the Packers gave an O-lineman a 3rd contract? Clifton maybe? I would think just about all contract extensions would be on hold at the moment given the restrictions with the CBA. Because it's the last year of the CBA, there are rules on how much of an extension you can give to players. The "30 pct rule." So I would guess if the new CBA gets ratified by the players the Packers would almost certainly talk to Bulaga about an extension. No clue how that works out, how they view Turner or Velheer's future. Though when you have to kinda coax a guy back from retirement, at best you're hoping he plays for one more year. As for the Packers not giving a guy a 3rd contract, there are a lot of reasons for that. Obviously by a guys 3rd deal he's going to be 8-10 years into the league. When we say "the Packers," that's pretty much Ted Thompson didn't. But again, I don't think signing Bulaga is something that would have been the best decision maybe 5-6 years ago, but at this point in Rodgers career, I think it's a bigger priority and the Packers may be more willing to buck the trend. We'll have to see, but the Packers not talking to Bulaga, I'm skeptical that's because they don't want him back. It wouldn't surprise me to see them sign him a few days before free agency as they've done with guys in the past.

That is exactly the issue I have with Turner. I know he played RT with the Bronco's and he was very good as a run blocker or just vs a bull rush, but he did not look anywhere near quick enough to handle the more athletic pass rushers. As for Linsley, I think he's closer to a Pro Bowler than an average or just a regular starter. He's been a Pro Bowl alternate the last couple seasons for what it's worth. If anything I think he's exceeded expectations since signing that 3/25 extension, but who knows. It sounds like Gute's going to hold off on making some roster decisions until he knows how free agency is going. Maybe if he can sign Hooper and Littleton for example, he decides it's worth it to go with Patrick over Linsley at center and save the money.

Yeah, I did see that after I posted. I saw Robinson suggest Poe, I'd throw Snacks Harrison in there, I think either would work. The only issue I'd have is that I think Clark kinda struggled when they kicked him outside this past year. His worst games where when he was playing outside and his best came over the center. I don't know if that was the reason he struggled because he was also a little banged up during that stretch. Whichever way you go though, we just have to get better than Lancaster. I'd rather see Preston Smith move inside and go with Gary and Za'Darius on the outside than another year of Lancaster as our starter.

Right, I remember them crediting that partially, but the bigger problem with Green was that he ran with the ball in the wrong hand. Be it right or left, I can't remember which, he never transferred the ball to the outside arm. It was just something he wasn't comfortable with. I can't remember if it was left or right, but just for arguments sake say it was left, every time he gets outside to the right, all the pursuit coming is going to be able to take a big swat at the ball. Either way, fumbling problems are easily correctible normally. Taylor doesn't run with the ball in the wrong hand. He gets a little loose with it. I don't think this is a big concern for him. If he were available by some miracle in round two, I'd definitely jump on it. He's probably worthy of a round 1 pick, but RB just isn't that big of a priority compared to the more obvious needs. But if Aaron Jones goes down it becomes a pretty big need pretty quickly. The whole offense pretty much revolves around your ability to run the ball, especially that outside zone. You need 2-3 good running backs and Taylor is a guy who played in that very system. Almost zero chance it happens, but I certainly wouldn't let the relatively few fumbles be the reason why.

Veldheer was really impressive last year in the short stints he took over. Again, I have zero confidence in Turner, but Gute hasn't been wrong about a whole lot thus far, so I've got confidence in him for the time being. It does seem like a lot of people covering the Packers think Linsley could be a cap casualty this year. Which is surprising to me given how good he's been, but you signed Patrick, so who knows. If going from Linsley to Patrick allows the Packers to be able to afford an Austin Hooper or Corey Littleton...it's hard to argue with that logic.

This makes more sense to me, but one of the Journel Sentinel reports just said that they thought Gute was more likely or at least willing to move up in the 1st round. I'd personally prioritize OT along with WR'er, regardless what you do with Bulaga. The Packers have a couple tackles who have pretty intriguing upsides right now, but this class is deep at both those positions. So if we could add one of those in the first two rounds without reaching, I'd be happy there. As for the NT....the Packers normally don't carry two NT's. Would you be in favor of kicking Clark out to DE in that event or are you just saying just add someone who can help defend the run on the DL?

You're right on Biegal. I only meant it didn't work out because it didn't work out for them. But I think they tried him inside about 2 weeks before they cut him. Bradford was given a little more time but he just didn't have much athletic ability. I could be wrong, but I thought he was like a 4.9 40 type guy. Matthews was a very different type of OLB'er than the Smiths. I remember watching him go up against Tyron Smith from the Cowboys and he just did not stand a chance. His big plays came through his relentless pursuit or because he could read the play and just explode through a hole or jump inside of a tackle(the fumble that helped save the SB where he hit Mendenhall when the Steelers were driving was a good example). No matter who we get to play MLB'er though, I'm not sure the results are going to be that much different if we don't upgrade from Lancaster. He was so awful at times last year...I'd really rather they upgrade there than put a lot of resources into the MLB'er position. I think you can get by on cheap FA's or lower round picks there as opposed to the DL. I don't think even Ray Lewis or Kuechly would have made THAT much of a difference vs the 49'ers last year. So they obviously need a MLB'er and one who can run sideline to sideline, but it doesn't work if your 3 technique is on the ground and the other teams tackle is getting to the second level so easily.

Apparently Gute has stated recently that they don't want to move Jenkins from LG. That they're happy with how he came along this past year, and don't want to move him around. He was drafted as a center, so maybe if they were to move on from Linsley, they'd change their minds. I would think with the dearth of good Offensive linemen in the NFL, you would be able to find a taker for Linsley for a ~4th round pick if you really wanted to move him. Pro Bowl alternate the last couple years and he plays almost literally every snap of the season for you. But he's also a really good fit for Lafleur's zone blocking. So if I could play GM for the Packers, I'd be looking at extending him rather than moving on from him. Taylor, he's obviously gone. I'm guessing the Packers will make some effort to trade him before they cut him..and perhaps someone offers up a conditional 6th or 7th for him, but I think it's safe to say he's gone. As for Bulaga...in the past, he'd probably be the easiest decision of all the Packers free agents. He's older, he'll be expensive, he's been injured. You have an All Pro LT who's going to be a FA pretty soon, you have a Pro Bowl caliber center who's going to be a free agent. But still, I cannot imagine Billy Turner holding up all year vs speed rushers and Veldheer was only available to the Packers because he said his body wasn't capable of playing a full season. So given how close the Packers are, how the 49'ers are so loaded up front, even with the likely loss of Arik Armstead, I would definitely try to bring Bulaga back. 3/35 with 12 million guaranteed might make sense. It's not ideal, but with Rodgers turning 37 late next season, I don't think you can afford to just hope that Billy Turner can be a starter on the outside in the NFL. If the Packers think highly of Patrick and his ability to play center, I think it'd make more sense to save money there knowing you have a guy you drafted in the 2nd round last year as a center who excelled at LG who could always move over and it's far easier to replace guards than tackles obviously. They don't usually give that 3rd contract to any position outside of QB. And it has almost always been the right decision. And it'd likely be the right decision here if Rodgers was 30 years old in my opinion, but the older he gets, the most important a good OL is obviously. The sticking point for me is I don't know what the hell to believe. The Packers are apparently going to aggressively pursue both Austin Hooper and Corey Littleton in free agency. I've read that both are their top targets and they'll be very aggressive in trying to sign both. And that'd be awesome, but while you can do a lot with the salary cap in terms of kinda pushing those problems down the road, you're going to be paying Clark and I'd assume Bahk in the near future(both are FA's next season I believe). Still, I'd try and bring back Bulaga as the top priority, accommodate Veldheer and then I'd make getting a young, talented tackle a priority. If you do sign Bulaga, I think you'd do it in the same way you paid Graham. Where you can get out of it in year 3 without it costing you too much.

Didn't we try Vince Biegal at MLB'er at well? We also did it with Carl Bradford from AZ State who was an absolute bust for us...even as a 3rd or 4th round pick. Neither experiment worked out too well(though Biegel has played well enough in NO and Carolina). I hadn't thought about Fackrell coming back and playing inside, but my guess would be as a guy who just had 10 sacks a year ago...however misleading those were, if he's going to take a 1 year deal for cheap, he'd probably rather stay outside. Intersting idea if he's game though. He is a long limbed guy who could make some of those throwing lanes smaller and he hasn't appeared to get lost in coverage. Playing next to Raven Green in the Nickel? Interesting idea...but I'd rather roll the dice with Burks, Summers, Bolton and then a 3rd-4th rounder who's available. Or even a guy like Josh Byrnes, a cheaper Free Agent.

That's pretty much what Schobert was in college. An OLB'er who had nearly 10 sacks and then moved inside at the next level. I don't know what his shuttle times looked like and I didn't think he'd be as good as he's been. Teams are talking about doing the same with Baun..or at least I've seen speculation that he may go higher because he has the ability to drop and play on the inside as well as rush the passer. I don't really think our MLB'er is going to make a big difference until we just get better on the DL. Clark is great, Lowry's solid, that's pretty much it. Keke has upside and looked good last year. Can't trust Adams any longer or Lancaster. Davis from Alabama was the best defender on the field his Frosh and Soph seasons in the playoffs and he's a prototypical 6'5 5 tech. I'd love to see him in round 2 and maybe the Packers add another DL in free agency. A Mike Pennel type. This is going to be such an interesting draft this year though. I think the Packers could go a lot of different directions than people think. I'm not sure that it's MLB'er/OT/WR'er in the 1st and 2nd rounds. I could see them picking Taylor if he's still there in the 2nd, a QB if a guy like Love drops in the 1st or even trading up for a guy like Ruggs in the 1st(apparently Gute has said he'd be willing to move up in the 1st). I wonder what the fan reaction would be if we drafted a QB in the 1st round who threw nearly as many picks as he did TD's from Utah State at this stage in Rodgers career?

I'm skeptical of any reports about the Brewers finishing in the red. That's basically asking us to just blindly believe the Brewers finances from a reporter who was told by who? Not an objective 3rd party most likely. And as so many have said, there are a lot of creative accounting measures that can help them show a loss when in reality they made money. But of course nobody on here knows what's going on. I am a bit surprised how many people are concerned about a billionaire losing a few million dollars in a particular year in one of their investments...one that most billionaires get involved in because they enjoy it and less because of the potential financial windfall. But then I also think the idea that the Brewers should take out loans in order to be able to meet the payroll obligations. I think what most fans want is pretty simple. A team that's competitive, that's trying to win and that occasionally will reach a bit further when they're close to winning to add a couple of pieces. I think it's pretty hard to argue that the Brewers HAVEN'T been doing that during Mark Attanasio's tenure. I just want to see the Brewers make smart decisions and every once in a while...sure, I'd like to see them really stretch their financial resources. But it seems like too many want them to do this annually. Strausburg for example. Great pitcher, but he averaged ~145 innings from 26-29. Is that really the type of guy the Brewers should be betting their financial future on? Wheeler was even riskier. I don't think there is a number that anyone can throw out there and say the Brewers should be spending this much per season. We're all just too ignorant about their financials. But just as I'm surprised to see how worried so many are about a billionaires finances, I'm equally surprised in the lack of faith in Attanasio. The idea that he's equally or more invested in making money from the franchise than he is in winning. A lot of these guys buy teams because they've had tremendous success and they want own a franchise so they can win. Again, I really haven't seen evidence that Attanasio is not living up to that.

I don't think this is even in the top 10 reasons baseball has lost popularity. All of the major sports have long periods of the same teams dominating, regardless of how they handle free agency and caps. I think the Patriots have more of an edge in the NFL than the Dodgers do in MLB because players are willing to play for less to go to the patriots whereis the Dodgers have to outbid people paying reasonable prices in order to get a free agent. I don't agree with this at all. The Pats aren't signing guys to discount deals. They're just run better than almost every other team and that's because of Belichick. They get former 1st round picks who have talent, but aren't well rounded players and carve out a niche role in which they can excel. They bring in veterans who don't have much less and again, put them in situations they can have success. So many of the moves they make don't work out, but they're not afraid to try.

It was bad at the time and there was no hindsight because a lot of posters said it was bad when it happened. This was by far the most annoying move made by the Brewers and the justifications for it were almost as bad. I don't remember what metic was used, but if you voiced your displeasure with that move, there was always someone cutting and pasting a list of how Claudio was right up there with Hader, Kimbrel and a couple other elite relievers of the last 2 years(before the trade). But as others mentioned pages earlier, it's far easier for more to accept that we made a bad deal and then just moved on rather than holding onto that guy because of what we gave up and continuing to throw good money after bad. Sterans does not seem to have any type of connection to players he acquired, only players who can help the Brewers. Which should be obvious, but it's human nature to what to be proven right and take longer to admit a mistake.

It also seems strange that we're questioning why he....as a 21 year old isn't getting as much out of Lancaster and Fackrell. And it's such a subjective argument...basically, those two guys are working harder and Gary isn't...Gary isn't making hustle plays. If you didn't like that pick, that's what you're going to see. You're not going to see the play where he came from the opposite side of the field and chased down a back on a screen play. I don't know how good he'll be. I hope he ends up closer to Brandon Graham(Slow start to his career became a very good player) than Jamal Reynolds, but there's almost no way to know right now.

You simultaneously complained about the Brewers trading Villar before he had a good couple seasons and then dismissed the idea of bringing him back BECAUSE of how he played in those seasons. I personally don't really care if we bring back Villar. I think he'd be a really nice utility player but I doubt he wants to play in that role. I also doubt anyone would be that invested in Villar if he wasn't a former Brewer.

The 2011 team was a helluva lot better offensively. They had no RB until they found one late in the year in Ryan Grant, they had players dropping like flies that year, one of their key players was Howard Green, a run stuffer we picked up off the street. Guys like Finley were dropping while we were relying on UDFA Sam Shields. But...and I thought this was obvious, the point isn't to go back and quibble over the talent on the 2010 team vs the 2011 team, I was just trying to say maybe this team can go on a run and win the SB despite the fact that they don't appear to be the favorites right now. That's it. Nothing more meant behind what I said. Just maybe this team gets some breaks and makes some timely plays and can get back to the SB despite the fact that there are better more talented teams.

The guy's always playing when he's beat to hell. He obviously runs the ball and takes a lot of punishment because of that, but he's also has NOT benefited from the protections that other QB's have gotten. Because he's so big and such a freakishly athletic big athlete, defensive players have gotten away with a ton of hits that they wouldn't have gotten away with against Rodgers or Brady or almost anyone else. I could definitely see Newton after sitting out this whole year and finally taking the time to get healthy still having a good stretch left in his career. Especially if he had a great defense, a really good running game(Montgomery looks like a really nice back). I really couldn't see him being WORSE than what Trubisky has been this year. If I was the Bears I'd try to help support Trubisky with a good TE and then obviously trying to upgrade the OL before I'd go out and take a chance that Newton is an appreciable upgrade over Trubisky. But obviously Bears fans aren't patient, the organization isn't patient and they don't have a lot of different options for upgrading that QB position.

One big problem is definitely Turner in pass protection. Both Bulaga and Bahk have played well below what's expected of them at times in the last 4-5 weeks, but Bulaga has a hand issue that should be cleared up and Bahk is a All Pro. But Turner....he just gets beaten so badly at times that he's a pretty big liability. But Seattle, SF...I don't really trust Jimmy G yet, but they've got a great running game and front 7, but it's not like Seattle's front 7 is a problem area for them. They have Wags and Clowney. And I think NO is probably better than both of them. I think I'd take my chances with SF, trust Rodgers to be able to move around in the pocket, hope Bulaga and Bahk can get it going and we can keep that offense under ~24 and give ourselves a chance. The 2010 team wasn't as good as the 2011 team, but they got hot at the right time and things clicked. Maybe that happens this year. I know I've been hoping for it all year, but it'd be nice if we could get Tonyan back, get a little more athleticism from the TE position and then get Raven Greene back. He was originally expected to come back around the Bye. He can do a lot of things in the middle of our defense, among them, hopefully help slow down some of these TE's that seem to carve us up.

Agreed, it's such a violent game, we have no idea what is going on with him even beyond the lower leg issues we've heard about. But even with that, heading INTO yesterday, he'd graded out as one of the best interior pass rushers in the NFL. So given that he's still about the same age right now that BJ Raji was when he was a rookie in the NFL, and he's not actually in a contract year, I don't think the BJ Raji comp is fair. Or at the very least it's incredibly premature.

Miley? Miley? Miley? Yes, sign a couple of guys to minor league contracts LIKE Gallardo and Miley, two players we signed to minor league deals and one of them ended up being very successful.

That was my thought too. Pulling that crap minutes after your team lost Game 7 of the World Series? Really dude? To me, he solidified that the only team he really cares about is his bank account. I know all these guys play for money, but most of them at least have a little tact. Maybe he was upset about them not using him when he wanted to pitch and got warmed up. You can't be as good at something as Cole is without loving what you're doing. I don't think the Astro's bring him back with all their young position players just starting to get more expensive. They certainly could...but it'll probably cost them a Springer or Correa.