Packers Huddle

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

31 Aug 2020 20:29

I disagree with the sentiment that if you draft Dillon you aren't paying Jones. Dillon gives you a cheap player at the position for 4 years which means you can afford to pay one RB.

I can see both takes. I'm fine either way with him. I won't like if the life of the contract hits double digit average annual value. But I like the 1-2 punch with different styles, strengths and weaknesses.

Here's a question I saw from Ask Vic on the topic of thunder/lightning

Matt from Minneapolis, MN
Dillon and Jones: "Thunder and Lightning." I know we all love a catchy nickname but, in reality, what does having a "Thunder and Lightning" backfield do to a defense? What are the benefits other than it sounds neat?

"It allows you to dictate to the defense. When you go big, they have to go big, too. When you go small and quick, they have to do the same. Having a running back with the size and power Dillon possesses will keep a linebacker on the field. The defense doesn't dare get light in the pants up front with Dillon in the game, or the Packers will pound. We saw that with Eddie Lacy. This is why I say you're not really running the ball if you're not running it with power. The defenders a defense uses to stop a speed back are the same defenders it uses to defend against the pass.
The big back opens up the passing game. Scheme personnel, not schemes."

THis is the part that most everybody is missing.
The drafting of Dillon helps the passing game by keeping an extra LB on the field and/or by forcing a safety into the box- that gets you single high - which is what Rodgers and MLF want in the play action game.

NCF wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 12:54

No one was going to take him. With the expected cap next year who could really afford him at that level? Teams are strapped on the cap right now. I don't expect to see very many "big deals" coming down the pipe until after the cap is set for next year. Anyone who does is playing with fire.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:16

No one was going to take him. With the expected cap next year who could really afford him at that level? Teams are strapped on the cap right now. I don't expect to see very many "big deals" coming down the pipe until after the cap is set for next year. Anyone who does is playing with fire.

There are literally big deals happening all the time right now. The NFL is operating with the informed knowledge that next year will be tight, and the subsequent years will be back in business.

Lots of people have been saying they'd be surprised to see big deals after the COVID cap deal was worked out, and yet we've seen multiple big deals--Kittle, Kelce, Mahomes, Clark... no fewer than normal. NFL teams are not playing with fire; they're operating within certain bounds, but they are doing so for good reason.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:20

Raptorman wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:16

No one was going to take him. With the expected cap next year who could really afford him at that level? Teams are strapped on the cap right now. I don't expect to see very many "big deals" coming down the pipe until after the cap is set for next year. Anyone who does is playing with fire.

There are literally big deals happening all the time right now. The NFL is operating with the informed knowledge that next year will be tight, and the subsequent years will be back in business.

Lots of people have been saying they'd be surprised to see big deals after the COVID cap deal was worked out, and yet we've seen multiple big deals--Kittle, Kelce, Mahomes, Clark... no fewer than normal. NFL teams are not playing with fire; they're operating within certain bounds, but they are doing so for good reason.

And those teams will have to pay the piper next year. KC is currently $30 million in the hole at $175 with only 45 players signed for 2021. Someone is going to get cut.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:24

And those teams will have to pay the piper next year. KC is currently $30 million in the hole at $175 with only 45 players signed for 2021. Someone is going to get cut.

Some likely will; most will just push money into future years.

The tv deals in 2022 and 23 will cover these gaps. 2021 is going to be tough for all. But teams are operating with the full knowledge that it is a one-year cap crunch and they can push money out forward or longer to get through it.

I mean heck, your team just traded a 2nd for an expensive player on a 1-year contract. Do you think they did so without any plans to keep him? Did they just give a 2nd up for a 1-year rental?

A couple teams will be in trouble. Most will just push money out and make up the difference over the next two years

Raptorman wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:16

NCF wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 12:54

No one was going to take him. With the expected cap next year who could really afford him at that level? Teams are strapped on the cap right now. I don't expect to see very many "big deals" coming down the pipe until after the cap is set for next year. Anyone who does is playing with fire.

Meanwhile...MN uses a 2nd round and 5th round pick to trade for a former All Pro who is currently at $17MM on the cap and hoping to go down to $13MM.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:16

No one was going to take him.

I don't care if he sat on the scrap heap. I just wanted the Vikings to cut him.

go pak go wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:36

Raptorman wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:16

NCF wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 12:54

No one was going to take him. With the expected cap next year who could really afford him at that level? Teams are strapped on the cap right now. I don't expect to see very many "big deals" coming down the pipe until after the cap is set for next year. Anyone who does is playing with fire.

Meanwhile...MN uses a 2nd round and 5th round pick to trade for a former All Pro who is currently at $17MM on the cap and hoping to go down to $13MM.

Yeah, I kind of don't get why you don't get get Clowney this year then go after Yannick in FA next year or just keep Clowney.

But whatev.

go pak go wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:36

Raptorman wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:16

NCF wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 12:54

No one was going to take him. With the expected cap next year who could really afford him at that level? Teams are strapped on the cap right now. I don't expect to see very many "big deals" coming down the pipe until after the cap is set for next year. Anyone who does is playing with fire.

Meanwhile...MN uses a 2nd round and 5th round pick to trade for a former All Pro who is currently at $17MM on the cap and hoping to go down to $13MM.

He went to $12 million.

BF004 wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 13:46

Yeah, I kind of don't get why you don't get get Clowney this year then go after Yannick in FA next year or just keep Clowney.

But whatev.

Because Clowney aint taking no $12M. If he would, he'd be on a team.

No word on guarantees yet, but yowzers. ByeBye Aaron Jones, if it is anywhere in the ballpark of this.

Packfntk wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 14:02

No word on guarantees yet, but yowzers. ByeBye Aaron Jones, if it is anywhere in the ballpark of this.

Yeah, that hurts. The Melvin Gordon contract I could easily stomach, but this would be tough.

These RBs only seem to get money on resigns, other than Leveon Bell, which was an effed up situation to a disastrous team.


Feel like I would be okay letting Jones dangle in FA for two weeks, but with a reasonable fair offer on the table.

Maybe 3 years 30-33 million tops.


But yes, do not give out 4/56 or anything dumb.

BF004 wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 15:06

These RBs only seem to get money on resigns, other than Leveon Bell, which was an effed up situation to a disastrous team.


Feel like I would be okay letting Jones dangle in FA for two weeks, but with a reasonable fair offer on the table.

Maybe 3 years 30-33 million tops.


But yes, do not give out 4/56 or anything dumb.

I still say I want a 2-year $25 million extension which results in a 3-year, $27 million total deal.

It gives him guarantees now. It lets him hit free agency again at 28; it keeps the cost under $10 million per year for us, and doesn't leave us stuck too long if he under-performs.

Admittedly, the 2021 cap crunch makes that very difficult because there isn't a lot of time or space to delay anything, so it may not be workable under the current structure.

But getting to announce it as a 12.5m/yr deal but actually acting as a $9m/yr deal suits me.

Weird looking contract for a sub par LT.

BF004 wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 15:14

If that turns out to be a 7-year $95M (inclusing his $10.3M due this year), that's actually just $13M/year with plenty of time to push some back as the cap grows and 2 years at the end without prorated signing bonus money pushing up his cap cost relative to his actual salary.

Busy day, lol

BF004 wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2020 15:14

This is why they stink. Decker is average.