BrewerFan

It does. It seems like a great way to listen to your players. Add that daycare for next year. I mean...how much could it cost relative to the Packers spending? Some of these are such obscure questions, it's hard to know what to make of them. He's "moderately willing to listen to the locker room?" I wonder if that gets better as it feels like it was just the defensive players last year. Thanks for posting though. Interesting to see what the players think about the organization.

Gutekunst also immediately talks about how they're always looking for competition and to improve there. On top of that, most good tackle prospects can play Guard. Tyler Smith is likely going to become the Cowboys LT. So if you draft a guy early and Walker wins the job...great. There's a good chance that player will be able to also play RG.

Ok...I thought it was originally going to be an international pick, but since they didn't agree on the international draft, they kept it as top 3 earned a comp pick. Apparently I was mistaken? So then I guess...lets hope Black finishes top 3 in MVP, but Chourio beats him in ROY😁

It's the MLB draft. I feel like a good draft vs an average or below average draft is largely based on the top of the draft. Combine that and the volatility of assessing Sophomore's in HS(not Jrs, but haven't really hit the circuit yet) and I'll bet many of the drafts that look like they're lesser drafts a couple years out change very quickly and have produced as much talent after the top half of the 1st round as any other draft. Even if it is a bad draft, there are still a LOT of guys who'll have plenty of value. So hit the gas, talk about how many picks we could get. Lets throw in the potential for Tyler Black to pair up with Chourio and both become top 3 in ROY voting and add another pick(to make up for Burnes now). However the draft is viewed, I trust this organization to squeeze the most out of it!

I don't know if he was that bad schematically(which isn't arguing, I just don't know Basketball like I know the sports I played)...BUT, it sure as hell seems like this team is playing with more energy and doing the small things much better. Just simple stuff like getting their arms up on defense when trying to deny and picking up deflections. It seems to me like the biggest issue was the personal relationships. Are they doing things that differently fundamentally defensively? All the schematic changes look small to me. I'd be curious what the Basketball aficionados' have to say about their actual changes aside from communication and being a more cohesive unit. But again, just from what I see, even Dame is getting in on the act. The ball movement also looks exceptional. I feel like that can help out on the defensive end. A good shot vs Dame or Giannis trying to win off the bounce(which they're good at) and then kicking it out, it was sloppier than they're playing, and that led to more fastbreak points. Jae Crowder looks like he's fitting in much better and Pat Bev is giving us quality minutes on defense. And finally, I wonder if Beauchamp can play himself into this lineup. I get tonight was garbage time, but looked exceptional. He's just capable of being an on-ball defender that no other wing on our team can be. It'd be great if he could round out his game, pick up some minutes so they can use him vs the Celtics bigger wings and be competent on the offensive end. At the very least, a high-energy player who can get some rebounds/tap outs, and keep hitting that corner 3 at a 41% clip? I still think there's a role for him...but time is winding down. We may look at this team that went through a struggle similar to the Celtics in Udoka's first year...they were awful early on, then they put the pieces together and hit their groove come April/May and June.

It is...but DT, Edge, there are a few positions you should always look to upgrade. Obviously, you need to look at the depth. For instance, I don't think it makes sense taking a WRer unless you really think there is an appreciable difference between them, Melton, Heath and the guys they'd be battling for that 6th spot. The same is true for the DL...but again, where DL is different is just that it's more important than other positions and, IMO, harder to find real impact players. I don't know how they feel about their depth, if they're going to use Wooden as an Edge/DT, they may still want to add a player. That's why the players I threw out were on both ends of the spectrum. Either the premiere IDL like Byron Murphy or Jer'Zhan Newton in rd 1 or McKinney/Sweat on Day2. A guy like Gabe Hall, he's likely a day 3 pick(also just an example) and with Slaton and Clark due to be FAs in 2025...unless we extend either, it's not a bad idea to try and improve the depth. I'd take his comments with a grain of salt. What's he supposed to say realistically? No? They've also spoken highly of Myers and Rhyan(Myers in particular). Also the question..."CAN he be LT1?" Yes, we saw that he can. We also saw that Jonathan Owens could be FS1. That doesn't mean it's not a position you don't try to upgrade(I know it's not the same, but I'm making the point).

Love really blew it. Had us in perfect position after 7 games...we were picking 5th. Wouldn't have taken much to move up!

That makes sense. Wyatt isn't really a great run stuffer...though I'd hope he'd be better in a 1 gap system where he's more free to just get upfield and try and blow plays up. The same for Brooks. Gabe Hall from Baylor is a guy we could pick up in the later rounds. In the earlier rounds, I think it has to be a stud that drops and DL studs usually don't drop. Sweat, McKinney at some point in rd 2, and then obviously Newton and Murphy could potentially be in play in the 1st, but I doubt they'll make it to the Packers pick. Both are versatile players.

I'm not saying I'd make that trade necessarily. That's obviously a ton to give up, but just in your hypothetical, if we were to move up, who would you do it for. I wouldn't do it for a WR other than MHJ. There isn't a defensive player IMO worth it there. At least as of now.

I mean...we still have Slaton. Constantly trying to upgrade the DL is a good idea...I'd never argue that. I don't think it's a need at this point.

I've said I'd LOVE to see the Packers draft Joe Alt. It really faded as the season went on and he kept moving up the draft boards and we kept moving down, but I think he's a Pro-Bowl LT year one and he could be an All-Pro very early in his career. #25, #41 and #58 would hurt, but I think he's good enough it's worth it. MHJ, Alt are two guys who are damn near locks(Bowers as well, but I wouldn't take a TE). As close as you can get making the jump to the NFL. Both have fathers who played at that level who'll help prepare them, both had fathers who were elite, both are uniquely talented with abnormal size and agility at that size. Don't think we can move up high enough to get MHJ, but probably enough for Alt, and then I think your OTs would be in place for the next decade.

I'm less interested in sacks from a player like that as I am in how they collapse the pocket. And Pro Football Network has him #44;

Is it cynical that I don't really view that as cynical? Clark is probably the biggest star in CBB right now...Duke is one of the bluebloods and you have a projected lottery pick getting hurt...it stands to reason there'd be more pressure to do something vs two players we haven't heard of. It's too bad, the "storming the court," is kinda cool when it's a big upset, but you have to put player safety above all else. I'd guess there have been backups who've twisted ankles, we just didn't hear about it. And no, I don't think you'd have the "Buster Posey," rule if it was a guy like Iannetta.

I'd throw Sweat in there also. I'd be surprised if he gets past rd 2. I'd think a 3-4 team would jump on him before he'd get to the Packers, but big guys who can rush the passers are useful. I thought the Packers mostly used the pre-draft process to evaluate guys they viewed as late-round picks. I know in '22 they did bring in Wyatt, Watson, and more guys who were in the 1st/2nd rd range, but I believe that was a bit of an outlier. I'd be curious how that compares to other teams. Do most teams bring in more first rd prospects or do they know they'll be able to meet with them at the combine or talk to them later on either way? I'm becoming a bigger fan of Cooper every time I go and watch a clip of him. I think a more aggressive play style is going to benefit Walker as it is...and they could probably keep Campbell and get by for another year, but Cooper looks like he's nearly as athletic as Walker, but more physical. I'm just excited to watch an aggressive defense that plays with their hair on fire. It'll mean we give up some big plays, but I think it'll be well worth it on the other side.

Salary cap set at ~255M. That's 13M over projections. Assuming they do go ahead and cut Bakh, Campbell, that'd put them at ~35M under the cap before signing their draft class. That puts them in a pretty good position to get through this off-season, be able to sign a marquee FA if they choose to go that route, but they don't have to add void years and more dead cap for the future. Should have a pretty clean payroll for 2025. Just Kenny Clark's ~14M void year...and that's assuming he's not extended. And then 2025 is the year the league as a whole is done with the Covid losses and the salary cap just goes back to normal. Not exactly what that means, how much of that is baked in, but the Packers have navigated the transition from Rodgers to Love as perfectly as you could, both on the field and from a salary cap standpoint. Hopefully, they can work out a deal with Love sooner that later as I think his number just keeps going up with other QBs signing extensions or guys like Wilson and Cousins, older QBs sign on the FA market. Either way, Cap purgatory for the Packers looks to be over after just one year of having to bite the bullet!

Well, it seemed like the point was comparing how our roster was constructed now vs how it needed to be constructed for a coach who runs a base 43, but plays the nickel the vast majority of the time. But if your complete conclusion is "we need a LBer to start and then depth," I'm...not really sure where I ever disagreed. If your argument is "big LB vs little LB," then I'd disagree a bit as Preston Smith and Quay Walker have never played the same position, but...I'm not sure what you're arguing about.

I love Adams...and I keep forgetting about him at the same time. Wilken, Black, Ortiz...and then I think of Baez, Pratt, Bitonti..and Adams could legitimately be the best of the group. I love our system. If we just had a couple more highly touted arms, I'd be even more excited...but I have little doubt we'll keep producing pitching.

I think it's be some situation where he's not completely healthy or suffers some setbacks in '25 and has a season...similar to this year(though not as effective). I could envision a mutual option being picked up in that scenario...still probably not. It's a very thin needle to thread. If Woody comes back and is somehow dominant next year, it's more likely it'd be rolled into an extension or they'd let him walk and offer the QO(meaning he declines). That's if he comes back. It's an expensive roll of the dice, but...on the other hand, it's one year of Yellich or basically Cain.

Ok...not like '24 is a huge factor in how this deal plays out beyond just him getting healthy. I wouldn't imagine they'd count on it, but hadn't seen they'd totally ruled it out. Either way, very happy to have him back in the fold.

I don't see where it says "definitely not pitching in '24." It was more along the lines of 'not thinking about when/if he'll be back this year, he'll see how it goes, but he'll definitely be back in '25.'

Yup! And I know it's not the end of the world if it dropped...the old Warren Buffett line "I haven't made or lost anything, I still own the stock." But it feels a lot better when it's up!

I'd be shocked if it goes down that far...but I'd buy more. They haven't even announced earned as of now, right? Eh, either way, I agree, I think this is just a blip(more accurately, people smarter than I with more financial acumen have told me it's a blip). I believe it. The only time I've ever done anything close to that was I was just out of college and the Banks plummeted. Took what little I could muster up and got Citi at ~1.50 a share. This was after the announcement they were getting bailed out. Not enough to make me rich, but to get me started and some options. A new Lakehouse though? 4 years? Hope you're 4 years from buying your own lake home. I'm lucky. I'm more of a Cabin type guy. MUCH cheaper...so I don't need the returns y'all have gotten. But congrats!

Why are you comparing edges to off-ball LBers? How is that an apt analogy? Were you not comparing off-ball LBers from different eras? I'm not sure how Preston Smith enters the conversation here at all... If you're defining Off-Ball LBers are "small LBers," ok...sure. Huh? No...I don't think we need to sign a FA at LB...with upside and then draft two more after signing Wilson. Unless you define someone like Oren Burks as the "FA with upside," then that'll probably be applicable to several positions between now and the end of the season. This would be akin to looking at CB, saying we need a nickel and then you asking if I think we only need 4 CBs. Oren Burks-SF Jamien Sherwood-NYJ Zach Cunningham-Philly Zach Baun-NOLA These are the "3rd starters," on modern NFL 4-3 defenses. All on pretty good defenses also. Most have TWO primary starters and then a 3rd who's often a converted safety or a big thumper who comes in to play the run. Those are among the easiest and least valuable types of players. 1-dimensional LBers. So no, I don't think we need "only 1 4-3 LBer." I also don't think it changes where we were in needs a month ago defensively much. We needed another starting LBer to put next to Quay. We still need that. If you're simply saying we need depth at every position...then yeah, other than WRer, QB(maybe), and DL, depth is a "need," at every position. So again, I don't view that as a real drastic change...and I suspect you won't either as you watch the Packers defense next year. We currently have Campbell, Walker, McDuffie, and Wilson as well as a couple of backups if we're being literal. We'll likely cut Campbell, but that's our guess, retain Wilson and then probably take a couple of athletes for STs. Guys like Tariq Carpenter. Tweeners who can play in the box safety. I doubt the Packers plan at LBers has changed as much as it has at safety. They reportedly offered the job to two 3-4 DCs, so I don't think they believed their personnel needed a significant overhaul irrespective of who they hired. It's a 4-2-5 league now. We have the luxury of having a guy like McDuffie ready to step in. He becomes more playable in the base now than he was. An athlete like Edgerrin Cooper or Jaylen Ford was likely a priority either way and adding depth was also likely a priority as it's a part of the roster that sees the most turnover...and that seems to be the case with most 4-3 teams. The 3rd LBer plays a quarter as much as the nickel. It's really not. Again, refer to how he plays. He's in the nickel personnel the vast majority of the time just as NFL teams are. He has two edges. They were usually standing. He's got two LBers the majority of the time, 5 DBs. The difference isn't in the positions NEARLY as much as it is in how they're used. MLF covered this last year. There ISN'T much of a difference between the 4-3 and the 3-4 in the modern NFL. The Packers personnel is particularly suited to adjust. We don't have undersized edges, we have DTs who can rush the passer. As he said, when they go to the Nickel, their Edges are bigger than most teams' DEs. They view them as DEs at that point. They were, like most teams, usually in their sub package. So the "need" now vs the need a month ago amounts to a guy who can backup the 3rd LBer who seldom plays? I guess if that's a big change, sure. The larger changes are in the secondary and the TYPES of safeties the Packers will need. They'll need a rangy CF who can cover a lot of ground(USC-Bullock type) and they'll need a guy who can come and play in the box(Beau Brade Maryland, Cole Bishop Utah). That's a much bigger change than the type of LBers we need(or the number).

Everyone's so worried about trading one of these OFers before their value drops. I'm more worried about trading one because we've got a surplus in the OF...leads to us trading someone too early. Frelick has the highest floor. I'm not sure I see the .320/.380 with 40-60 2B/3B outcome being real likely, but I'd rather hold, wait and see who performs and if someone loses some luster by that point, so be it. You certainly need high Avg/OBP types, but it's sure nice to have a #5/6 hitter who hits .245 with a .350 OBP who can hit 30+ HRs and also play an elite CF. And Mitchell is somewhere in the middle of the two. If I had to deal one, it'd be Mitchell, but unless someone's going to offer up a nice pitching prospect we can do something with, then I'm more than happy hanging onto all 3 from this group.

That's going a long way to make Adames fit...and Machado is expected to be able to play the IF this year. I don't think Adames is the guy they'll target. A SS a year away from FA when they have a lot of IF options is a lot more expensive than a Corner OFer in the same situation. For a team that's been tripping over themselves to trade off highly touted prospects, it's kinda incredible what they have in the cupboards right now. I'd gladly take Lesko. Feels like the type of pitcher the Brewers do well with. I'd also include Williams in the deal...but I'd want back more than I'd assume the Padres are willing to trade...then again, assuming what prospects the Pads are willing to trade is usually a pointless endeavor. I place very little value in the BTV simulator, but Frelick, Williams and Turang for Lesko and Merrill come out as almost a perfectly even deal(I know they're not trading Merrill...most likely).