BrewerFan

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).

Yes, I used more recent examples rather than going back to the Reagan administration. I also cited a more recent study of these exact types of injuries. Not just using ALL shoulder injuries...so not comparing Nelson's shoulder reconstructive shoulder surgery as it wasn't even slightly similar. And Kyle Hendricks had "meh results?" Career FIP of 3.80. Post capsular injury, 3.81. If the question is returning close to his previous performance, I'd say that's a pretty good example. But I guess we could throw Sandy Koufax into the equation as well😁 I mean, that was 18 years removed from Vukovich...as opposed to 40 years.

They could...I think it's less likely as Gutekunst has traded down just once(Jaire, added a future 1st) and traded up in several others. For Jaire after trading down, for Love, tried to trade back into the 1st for Watson(Minnesota was smart to not trade 32 and give GB a 5th year). These mock drafts make trading down far more appealing given how these players are all kinda lumped together yet. I'd guess by the time the Packers are on the clock, they'll be aggressive...but moving down to ~36 with AZ(for example) and adding a pick in the late 2nd certainly makes sense. Patrick Paul is all over the place on these mocks, but seems like he's got a big upside. I've seen McCormick in some more Edge is weak in this class, so I think you're right, teams will trade up. The tend to anyway. Not sure you'll see teams reaching for OT as it's such a deep class there, but the Packers seem to be in a place where the elite OTs will be gone on most mocks with another set like Morgan, Suamataia, Guyton possibly available where they pick in the 2nd. I think as the process goes on, the chances Cooper goes before 41 will just keep climbing. If they don't get Cooper, Wilson from NC State and Ford from UT are two others who I think would be really good fits.

I think I said we needed another LBer and didn't say we needed a DL(but you should always draft one if a good one falls). And that we needed another LBer either way. I also don't think anyone targets "small," LBers. I don't think that'd ever be cited as a need. Teams obviously want bigger LBers...they just usually(or at least often) take a bigger College Safety. A player like Jaden Hicks who I've mentioned or James Williams from Miami. You're playing 3 LBers maybe 20% of the time. The Jets #3 played about 17% of the snaps, the Buccs played about 15%, and the 49ers Burks played 35%. That's on the high end because he started some games. So we need another starting LBer. We needed that before. That's also in line with what he did at BC. Before we hired Hafley, assuming we were staying in a 3-4, we needed secondary help, especially CB, an upgrade at nickel and...another LBer. After we hired Hafley? It really hasn't changed. We agree our edges fit. We mostly agree our DTs fit(I don't agree they need to move off Slaton via trade or cut). Walker is a great fit. McDuffie is an obvious fit in the base. Check out the Boston College-SMU game. The personnel he uses isn't much different than the Packers. Two DL, the edges standing up, usually 2 LBers. I don't think we need to re-sign Wilson...draft two LBers and then sign a FA at the position as well.

I think the best way to guess what Hafley will do is to look at what he did at BC. He played a 4-3...but his DEs stood up. So really hard to tell the difference from a 4-3 to a 3-4 most of the time. Our roster is incredibly versatile. I don't think Slaton is on the cutting block. You still need run stuffers and he's very good at that. He's also cheap. No reason to not bring him back. Also, if Hafley is a good DC, he's going to adjust MUCH more than Barry did. So there will be games you'll need a the size. Also, we don't really have good run-stuffing DL other than Clark and Slaton. Brooks and Wooden are high-effort players, Wyatt is very obviously better as a pass rusher. *Campbell will very likely be cut unless he takes a pay cut. He's got almost 11M new dollars this year. He's not earned that after the last couple of years. I don't even know if they offer him the pay-cut. I'd like to see Eric Wilson back. He was a pretty solid LBer for a couple of years with Minnesota and he's a really good depth guy and STs player. He's obviously not ideal, but he's experienced and as long as he comes back for the veterans minimum, I think he's worth keeping(not a hill I'd die on though). I don't think much has changed(which I think was effectively your conclusion). You needed that second athletic LBer. That becomes an even bigger priority. You needed secondary help. Now you need a more athletic safety to roam around and play the single-high, a more physical one to play in the box. Not everyone is going to fit the role perfectly, but a pretty good year for both bigger, physical safeties and rangy safeties. I'm still very much in favor of OL early, Cooper DeJean looks like a really fun player. Someone who could play the role Woodson played. But if we draft him, he has to say "IWWA" like Bulaga does. I feel like that should be mandatory.

Yeah, their performance in STing is going to decide just about everything. Unless they're determined to stop his clock, if he hits, he'll play, if he doesn't, he'll start in AAA. I think Mitchell is as likely to start in AAA as the 26-man after a couple of years of injuries, but we'll see.

Yes...when talking about the Brewers and their ability to develop pitching, I was CLEARLY talking about the 1980s and now the current iteration of the Brewers with their pitching lab are recent history. Pete Vukovich? That's...really? Is there any attempt at an intellectually honest discussion on this topic or are we seriously comparing rehabbing pitchers in the 80s and their shoulder injuries with 2024? This is just silly and pointless. Questioning if he's going to come back is valid. Using Teddy Higuera and Pete Vuckovich just nonsensical. The "vast preponderance," of evidence would suggest capsular repair is becoming a much BETTER treated injury and the recovery rate is much higher than....say 40 years ago. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9978988/

Then look at Kyle Hendricks. He came back...or Julio Urias. He also came back and was elite. I tend to trust the Brewers with Woody. They don't just throw around money and their recent history with pitchers should give them the benefit of the doubt.