Finish the sentence: Packers win the Super Bowl if...

[Patler]

The only way Neal is a loss is if Perry goes down - which is obviously a possibility. Hayward contributed very little last year - nothing I'd say - that his replacement isn't almost a certainty to fulfill - at far lower cost.

I don't see how any of those guys mentioned are realistically losses at this point. In all of those cases, I'd say the odds are high that the guy who takes those snaps (APRH again) brings equal or greater value.

I misunderstood. I thought your lists were quantitative identifications of loses and gains, not a qualitative analysis.

Following your initial comment, if Lacy is listed as "hopefully" a gain, Neal and Hayward should be identified as "hopefully" not losses. Hayward was the nickel back, his replacement (Rollins?) is unproven. Didn't one of the advanced stats sites have Hayward among the league leaders in some metric, QB rating against, or something like that? About Neal I am undecided; however, he was the starter even in Perry's healthiest year so far. I liked how Perry played in the playoffs, but I'm not sure we can assume Neal won't be missed..

[Joemailman]

Hayward was the nickel back, his replacement (Rollins?) is unproven. Didn't one of the advanced stats sites have Hayward among the league leaders in some metric, QB rating against, or something like that?

McGinn actually gave Rollins a higher grade.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...366332901.html

CASEY HAYWARD: Played 88.1% of the downs, providing a steadying influence for the rookies and usually being where he was supposed to be. The Packers normally would re-sign him, but with all the young prospects at cornerback they're probably not going to make a legitimate offer. After allowing eight plays of 20 yards or more from 2012-'14, he gave up too many (nine) this year. Hayward isn't physical in the bump zone and is susceptible outside on take-off routes. He tied for third in tackles with 88, but also led the team in misses with 14. He failed to intercept a pass, and with only nine passes broken up in 1,048 snaps he was last in PBUs with one every 116.4. His ability to find the ball might have waned due to numerous hamstring injuries and a stress fracture in his foot. Grade: C-minus.

QUINTEN ROLLINS: It took until mid-season before Rollins gained full health and was able to move past Hyde in the nickel defense. Later, when Sam Shields missed 4 1/2 games, he played extensively at right cornerback. In all, he played 30% and offered promise of an outstanding future. He's a hitter, a ball-hawk and a rugged, effective blitzer. Of the seven cornerbacks, his rate of passes defensed (one every 35.7 snaps) and his rate of tackles (one every 9.9 snaps) both ranked No. 1. He dropped four interceptions, too. Grade: C.

[pbmax]

I misunderstood. I thought your lists were quantitative identifications of loses and gains, not a qualitative analysis.

Following your initial comment, if Lacy is listed as "hopefully" a gain, Neal and Hayward should be identified as "hopefully" not losses. Hayward was the nickel back, his replacement (Rollins?) is unproven. Didn't one of the advanced stats sites have Hayward among the league leaders in some metric, QB rating against, or something like that? About Neal I am undecided; however, he was the starter even in Perry's healthiest year so far. I liked how Perry played in the playoffs, but I'm not sure we can assume Neal won't be missed..

I think that was PFF and it was a head scratcher. He allowed a number of completions as he chased crossing routes across the middle. Not entirely his fault as the defense is designed in such a way to make that an effective counter, but he wasn't doing much other than tackling well on those.