Packers used the Rasul cap savings to sign Xavier. I'm fine with that.
Printable View
Packers used the Rasul cap savings to sign Xavier. I'm fine with that.
The difference, though, at the time of the trade was the Bills thought they were a legit contender for the Owl. GB was sitting in a bad place and looking not so good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Campbell
I pretty damned happy about the McKinney too.Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpe1027
But we still have nearly $23M in cap space now for this year - and that already includes of the $8M cap hit for McKinney. We had the cap space for Rasul. I don't think the Love contract needs to have much impact on this years number. They might choose to bring some of that hit forward because they have so much space now.
I just looked up Jaire's number for this year - $24M against the cap according to Spotrac. That guy has to start earning his money again. I don't think he's even in the slightest danger of getting cut because it would trigger $35.5M in dead money against the cap this year.
Again, I think Brian made the trade solely to convert a current asset into a future asset, because he thought our window wouldn't be open for a while.
Exactly. They traded a future asset for a current asset, and we did the opposite.Quote:
Originally Posted by SudsMcBucky
They will need the cap space for extending Love. They also might want to extend Kenny Clark.Quote:
But we still have nearly $23M in cap space now for this year - and that already includes of the $8M cap hit for McKinney.
I don't think we have a significant need for additional free agents at this point, but the upcoming re-signing of Love and probably Clark too should not require massive cap space, at least not unless they decide to do less backloading than usual. If we needed a low cap number for Love and Clark, we certainly could do it that way.
I am pretty sure the draft picks and undrafted free agents are going to eat up a lot of that cap space. Maybe as much as $15M.
Per lombardiave.com.Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpe1027
Over The Cap projects the Packers will need $3.92 million in cap space to sign their rookie class.
They estimate the class will cost $12.67 million, but the cap hits are significantly lower, as each new player is replacing someone already on the roster.
Yeah, I don't think that's correct. They have ~20M in cap space now, players have already left. Bakhtiari's gone, Jones, Runyan, etc. They'll get some cap space from Campbell when June 1 hits, but they have to sign rookies and FA and that $20M number is what they have for space.
It will take about $13M to sign the rookies, leaving them with about $7M for in-season emergencies, PS callups, etc. Any extensions will have to have some other kind of manuever... so I suspect Jordan Love extension happens closer to the start of training camp.
Last year they were really cap strapped, this year they are cap limited, next year they'll be free of most of their big contracts and have cap space to manuever.
That assumption works if none of the players cut have any dead cap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Campbell
I was mostly joking Patler. I actually like this pick more than most here. Mostly based off tape I like Hopper as much as I like Cooper....which is why I didn't like taking an off ball LB as early as we took cooper. And even if we had taken who I wanted (Wilson) I still wouldn't be thrilled with the Douglas trade. Now that we didn't draft a single CB in a deep draft I REALLY hate the trade.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patler
Also, I hadn't actually seen Scott C post about this. I saw the "final" effect of trading Rodgers and then looked to see who we got with the Douglas pick.
Kalen King?Quote:
Now that we didn't draft a single CB in a deep draft I REALLY hate the trade.
Next year's draft at CB is supposedly much better than this year, which was kinda meh at CB.
My bad. And I love the pick for value. As we say in baseball, if he put it on tape he can do it again. King put tape together that had him in the top 15 conversation. No reason to believe he isn't capable of starting in the NFL.Quote:
Originally Posted by run pMc
When you read scouting reports questioning his instincts at processing plays, he does sound like Burks. But Burks was a safety who converted to LB. I think Hopper is a real LB who plays more physical than Burks. I didn't like the value in the 3rd round, but I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up better than Burks.Quote:
Originally Posted by RashanGary
This dude had a 22.7 missed tackle percentage during the 2023 season.
DeVondre Campbell appeared in 13 games last year, including the playoffs. Campbell's missed tackle rate was at nearly 10 percent after being at 2.8 percent during his All-Pro season.
Seems like a giant red flag. I have no idea how you draft a guy this flawed in the top 100.
Average athlete too. It would be more understandable if he was a 9.5 RAS guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Campbell
He’s a really good special teams body type. He’s, by all accounts, an incredible lockerroom guy. I guess a ST guy who helps quay and edge develop by setting a tireless tone and all football mindset isn’t the worst thing in the world. But it looks pretty bad if you’re expecting him to actually play defense.
I don’t know if you want to make a habit out of drafting cheer leaders and motivation interns with 3rd round picks.
He's just above the average RAS for NFL players, which means he's plenty athletic. Half of the players have lower RAS scores
There will be plenty of good players with lower RAS scores.
What concerns me about Hopper is that his poor agility scores might indicate why he misses so many tackles. He might have a physical weakness they can't do anything about.