Williams trade

[Harlan Huckleby]

(3) Tag him and let him play out the year at which point you ask this question again in the next offseason.

not a bad idea, Lurker. Buy some time to see if that sluggard Harrell comes around.

[Lurker64]

(3) Tag him and let him play out the year at which point you ask this question again in the next offseason.

not a bad idea, Lurker. Buy some time to see if that sluggard Harrell comes around.

I don't think either of us are in a position to really tell how good of an idea it would be. Since "Franchising him is safe" really comes down to a question about how volatile the situation would be and whether that would hurt morale or locker room chemistry, whether there would be a threat of a hold-out, etc.

I don't know Corey Williams, I have never talked to Corey Williams, and I have never been in the Green Bay Packers locker room so I can't personally attest to how much of a bad scene this would be. However, Thompson, McCarthy and other Packer personnel people probably have a lot better shot at correctly diagnosing the situation than anybody on the internet.

But, like I said of the reasonable alternatives, "Tag him and trade him" or "Tag him and play him" are the two best choices (in some order.) Which one is the best, we're not in position to tell.

[SkinBasket]

If this is too mind-bending for you, no need to keep up.

The only reason not to keep up is because you're dancing naked around your own little la-la land. You'll have to forgive me for declining the invitation to join your one man conga line.

[Harlan Huckleby]

However, Thompson, McCarthy and other Packer personnel people probably have a lot better shot at correctly diagnosing the situation than anybody on the internet.

Of course this statement can be made about each and every change the Packers make. This view only leaves room to say hozannahs for our leaders.

There's a hot thread about a dark city in the Romper Room, i'm going back over there.

[The Leaper]

NO!

To say otherwise is stupid. We just lost the one DT we had who could put any pressure on the QB, and had 7 sacks in each of the last 2 seasons.

Short term, there is no way that we improve. You can't lose a player who demands the contract CW just pulled down and say your team got better for it.

Long term, we likely do improve...because CW isn't worth all of the coin he pulled down, and Thompson has proven he is adept at finding maximum value with 2nd round selections. We also still have lots of young talent on the DL that is still developing, which could mitigate the loss of CW.

There also is the issue of whether or not we get anyone else with the cash that CW would've tied up. Future signings might also have to be factored into the equation.

[Fritz]

If you choose to look at this Harlan-style, then you could look at what the consequences of doing things differently might be.

1. Williams gets a big ol' contract and stays. Sal cap is affected.

2. Harrell gets traded. For what, though? A first round pick who had a forgettable first season. What could you get? A second? Prolly not. Maybe a third?

3. Surer knowledge of what you have on the d-line. You pretty much know what you've got with Williams and company.

Now, you can also replace number 1. with let him play for a year and bolt. Or you can replace it with Williams's agent cannot agree to an extension, Williams becomes unhappy, sits out of camp and forces a trade. Would you get a second for him then? Unlikely, I think.

I think Harlan's alternative view is not as attractive as the view we have with Thompson taking the action he did. Williams was moved at the time he had the utmost value, and given what he got in a contract, it's questionable as to whether he was worth that.

If Harrell turns out to be a stud, we'll applaud the trade, at least if the guy picked with that Cleveland second rounder turns out to be a Jennings quality player.

If Harrell sucks and TT drafts a dud in the second and Williams has another 7 sacks next year, we'll all be pissed.

[Joemailman]

I said no, but that is just a statement regarding the state of the team right now, not a prediction of whether the trade will help the Pack this season. If Harrell and Muir step up this year, and the pick is able to immediately upgrade the Nickel back or Tight end positions, the trade could very well pay off this year.

[Cheesehead Craig]

The trade immediately made the team better. CW said he wanted out and was upset about the tag. He would have been a cancer and ruined the chemistry on the team.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The trade immediately made the team better. CW said he wanted out and was upset about the tag.

Well, what you are saying is they made the best of a bad situation. That doesn't mean the team got better.

The franchise tag is a strange rule. IT seems like every player would be angry to get the tag, or at least it is in their interest to claim to be. I doubt the situation with Williams is any different from every other attempt to keep a player an extra year with the franchise tag.

[The Leaper]

Players are always upset about the tag until it comes time to play...then they forget about it and hit the field. How many dozens have players have griped their ass off when they were tagged? Hell, Briggs said he would NEVER play for the Bears again prior to 2007. Am I mistaken, or did he play for the Bears in 2007?

The players realize it is part of the way the game is played...and their value will only go down by being a jackass. CW might not have liked being tagged, but if he had not been traded, he would've been playing in 2008 for Green Bay...and I doubt he would've been a cancer.

[RashanGary]

We had two options to keep Williams.

1. We franchise him. We don't budge. He gets pissed, skips camp, plays in the games and then we either let him go for a mid/late round comp pick or do it again next year.

2. We pay him 6 years, 38 mil. I don't think he's a good enough player to invest that kind of commitment in through age 34.


So would I rather have the 2nd round pick than the franchise headache or the long term deal that I think will be counterproductive? Yeah, I'll take the 2nd round pick.


As far as the question; is our team better, I think it's not better short term, but will be better over the long haul with the pick and not having a good player taking up 38 million of our cap space that should be used on a better player.

On top of that, I think both Harrell and Jolly will be better. Even if we didn't have Harrell, I thought Jolly was a better player last year.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Players are always upset about the tag until it comes time to play...then they forget about it and hit the field. How many dozens have players have griped their ass off when they were tagged? Hell, Briggs said he would NEVER play for the Bears again prior to 2007. Am I mistaken, or did he play for the Bears in 2007?

The players realize it is part of the way the game is played...and their value will only go down by being a jackass. CW might not have liked being tagged, but if he had not been traded, he would've been playing in 2008 for Green Bay...and I doubt he would've been a cancer.

if you are right, I wish they would have kept him for a year to monitor Harrell's progress.


but water over the dam.

[Cheesehead Craig]

The trade immediately made the team better. CW said he wanted out and was upset about the tag. He would have been a cancer and ruined the chemistry on the team.

Well, what you are saying is they made the best of a bad situation. That doesn't mean the team got better.

Nope. I'm saying we got rid of a player who didn't want to be here and keeping him would have been a bad move. Would have pouted and been a disruption. Thus the team is better now that a malcontent is gone.

[The Leaper]

if you are right, I wish they would have kept him for a year to monitor Harrell's progress.

Perhaps...but they are different players. Harrell is a massive run stuffer who people HOPE can collapse the pocket when he gains strength. Williams was a pass rush specialist who used speed rather than bulk to get to the QB.

I don't think the notion that Harrell is the replacement for Williams jives with the reality of their talents and abilities.

[SkinBasket]

And don't forget we have another rookie at the position in Bolston to provide a jump start on filling the rotational role that Williams was good for.

There is no reason to think that between Harrell, Muir, Jolly, and Bolston, along with whatever other fatties we stir up before camp, we can't find someone either almost as good or maybe even better in a starting role than Williams was.