PeaveyFury
-
Posts
12,809 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors
Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by PeaveyFury
-
Interesting move. As said, I expect the Bears to match whatever we offered, but I hope we structured it in a way that makes it hard. Could be interesting to see if they put a 'poison pill' in there to dissuade a match. Fuller was very good last year, and ranked out solidly as a legit #1 CB. He'd be a great get if the Bears don't make and assuming he stays healthy. -
It's also worth noting that when the Packers decide to move on from an aging veteran, it rarely bites them. James Jones (the first time)? Greg Jennings? Josh Sitton? All went on to do very little outside the organization. Where we've been bit recently is younger guys like Hayward and Hyde who they weren't willing to pay what their value was in the open market. Deciding to move on from older players, though, has generally been the right decision based on their production thereafter.
-
Reportedly $13 mil guaranteed from the Raiders for Jordy. The Packers really liked Crabtree back when he was drafted, and there was a lot of chatter about them considering taking him rather than Raji. Obviously they didn't, but it'd be interesting to see if they talk now.
-
Looks like 3/$30 mil, with $22 mil in the first 2 years for Graham.
-
Plausible that Reuvers could help with a year of additional time in the weight room, yes.
-
I believe both are expected to redshirt, but who knows. I think they need a 4/5 that'll contribute right away to help Happ next season.
-
Correct. I'm really hoping we look into the grad transfer market this year. Could really use another 4/5.
-
Unsurprisingly, Van Vliet will be leaving the program: http://uwbadgers.com/news/2018/3/13/mens-basketball-van-vliet-to-explore-transfer-options.aspx
-
$5 mil for Wilkerson, with $3 mil in incentives. Nice deal.
-
I'd expect Montgomery to move back to WR most of the time out of the slot, which helps with the offense as well, but they'll need to add another WR as the 2 sooner rather than later.
-
Ian Rapoport says they’re trying to re-work Cobb’s deal as well.
-
You're right, but they're wrong, or at least not telling the whole story. I'm sure part of the delay here is the conversations they're having to free up more of that space. They hypothetically have 30-40 million that they could get today, if they made some tough (but probably needed) decisions along with extending Rodgers.
-
I'm not sure this narrative is correct. I don't recall an offseason beyond Ted's first that the team had or claimed to have cap trouble. If anything, they've consistently been able to manage their cap efficiently and wisely. The issue is that the organization assigned values to players and a corresponding value they'd be willing to pay, and that prevented them from signing guys that could potentially help during these early days of free agency. The unanswered question is whether the new regime is willing to be less rigid about this than Ted was. It is also nice to hear about a willingness to use draft capital for established players. I think you can manage a roster more efficiently by giving up a 5th for a player at a position of need than by spending crazy money in early free agency.
-
Mort is reporting that Randall will play safety in Cleveland, not corner. I found that a bit interesting...
-
I was initially guilty of this as well. I remembered how the Lucroy stuff went down a couple of years ago differently than it actually had when I went back and actually looked again.
-
Not a fan of signing Lynn to a big money, multi-year deal, but this is a nice deal for the Twins. This should potentially get a market set for Cobb as well. What a crazy offseason, though. Did any of us think there'd be a chance Lynn would sign a deal totalling 12 million?
-
The Packers can grab ~$2.6 million if he restructures, so he'd seemingly be a good candidate for that. But they would get more if they just parted ways. Really, the players that are going to be interesting to watch are Nelson, Cobb, Matthews, and Bulaga. Rodgers will be extended and that will free up cap, but they could gain more by working deals with these four. If they're not willing to talk, I could see one or more getting the boot.
-
The money is there, it just needs to be found via either moving on from aging players or getting them to restructure. They technically have the space to sign at least one of those guys, but they'd have to make corresponding moves somewhere down the line. I've seen projections that a Rodgers extension could net them $10-15 mil in cap room as well, so the money is definitely there if they want it.
-
And I think it's fair to look at his stats last year and say that he didn't play well. But it's not like Hundley where he had 2+ years in the system and had some talent around him. Again, if he's called into action in 2019 and plays like Hundley did, then I'm disappointed with that result as well. In the meantime, they were likely to use a pick on a QB regardless, and this probably allows them to skip that and devote the attention elsewhere. Coupled with a Hundley trade/release and a veteran acquisition, they've at least addressed the makeup of the QB room without giving up much capital, if you buy that Randall didn't fit with their future plans. Some chatter out there about a Hundley trade to Oakland or Tennessee.....
-
Fair enough. I misunderstood your post as questioning whether they have a plan rather than 'we'll have to see what the plan is', which is a reasonable take. I do, however, take issue with calling a guy who started as a rookie on a poor team a bum one year after being drafted in the 2nd round. If he still plays like Hundley in two years that's another story.
-
Well sure. But 1) how is this trade status quo? When was that last trade the Packers made that was player-for-player? and 2)it's the first move of the offseason! How can we possibly know if there is a plan or not at this point?
-
The "best corner on a horrible defense" doesn't mean that you're a quality player. He graded out as the #81 CB in the league last year- not a ringing endorsement. Coupled with his attitude issues with the coaches and apparently the players as well, no big loss. You can live with stuff like that from a quality player like Talib or Sherman, but not from a guy who barely grades as a passable nickel corner. Sure, if this is the only move they make prior to the draft, I can understand the concern of opening another roster hole to fill on defense, but this is literally the first move the new GM has ever made. If we end up with a better group of corners come camp, no one will remember that Randall was even on the team.
-
To elaborate on my thoughts following the initial surprise, I think this says a couple of things: First, Pettine and the defensive staff either didn't think Randall was suited to play in the new defense, or his attitude issues with McCarthy were bigger than they let on. Or both. Second, clearly the recognition is there that there must be a better plan B than Hundley. Picking up Kizer is an interesting move, for sure. EDIT: Reports tonight indicate that some of the veterans wanted Randall released last year. Rather than releasing him, at least they moved up in the middle rounds and grabbed a QB prospect instead. The move also frees up ~$800k in cap space. Also, the Packers really liked Kizer in the draft last year: http://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/236387/deshone-kizer-to-packers-makes-more-sense-as-trade-talk-than-actual-pick
-
Well, that was unexpected....
-
Done deal, per MLBTR.
