JOSH SITTON>>>LOCK HIM UP>>>>PACKER PERSON

[Deputy Nutz]

A guard isn't as valuable as a left tackle, but that doesn't mean they are easy to replace. A turd at left guard is still a turd.

[bobblehead]

This.

But I believe that the whole reason folks are skeptical is because Ted won't talk, and is misleading when he doesn't need to be. Looking back at the roster between now and when Ted took over 3/4ths of the team is new. When Ted and McCarthy took over the prevailing statements were "We are not rebuilding, we're just painting the dream house" or something to that effect.

Had he told us we were rebuilding, I don't think we'd be talking about personnel moves like this.

There is a case that can be made for "all's well that ends well", however, I do think that label will follow Ted, along with our respect for achieving the pinnacle with his fortitude and belief. (It was damn hard to type that....)lol

It would have been impossible for TT to be honest in the beginning with the former GM as his coach.

TT: My predecessor left this team largely devoid of talent and in contract hell. I will rebuild the roster while still remaining competitive with that dolt as my coach.

Plus, no GM says his team stinks or that he is rebuilding (very rare if any). He also did accomplish a 13-3 season rather quickly. I would also like to see how many NFL teams HAVEN'T turned over nearly 3/4ths of the roster in 6 years. But I get your point and I wish GM's were a bit more honest with the fans. Its just that saying we are rebuilding isn't good for morale or ticket sales....sort of like a politician telling you he is going to increase spending and taxes.

[RashanGary]

This.

But I believe that the whole reason folks are skeptical is because Ted won't talk, and is misleading when he doesn't need to be. Looking back at the roster between now and when Ted took over 3/4ths of the team is new. When Ted and McCarthy took over the prevailing statements were "We are not rebuilding, we're just painting the dream house" or something to that effect.

Had he told us we were rebuilding, I don't think we'd be talking about personnel moves like this.

There is a case that can be made for "all's well that ends well", however, I do think that label will follow Ted, along with our respect for achieving the pinnacle with his fortitude and belief. (It was damn hard to type that....)lol

3/4 of the team? Driver, Clifton, Tauscher, Jenkins, Wells, Barnett. . . . .Am I missing someone? It's more like 90% and it's going to go up to 95% after this year when Tauch, Barnett and Jenkins move on.

[Guiness]

Not really the same situation.

MN in their offer to Hutchinson said that if he wasn't the highest paid lineman on Seattle than the full $49M was guaranteed. SEA had just signed Jones their All-World LT to more. So for SEA to keep Hutchinson they would have had to guarantee the whole 7 year $49M contract even if Hutch got hurt or play dropped off. No team could resign their players with that clause in the the contract.

Maybe that leason taught TT to extend his core players before their contracts have expired.

Getting somewhat OT here, but this isn't the 'poison pill' as I remember it. I thought it had to do with playing more than x games in a certain state?

edit: checked, you're right. It was Seattle's 'retaliation' that had the home game clause.

[Patler]

But I believe that the whole reason folks are skeptical is because Ted won't talk, and is misleading when he doesn't need to be. Looking back at the roster between now and when Ted took over 3/4ths of the team is new. When Ted and McCarthy took over the prevailing statements were "We are not rebuilding, we're just painting the dream house" or something to that effect.

Had he told us we were rebuilding, I don't think we'd be talking about personnel moves like this.

There is a case that can be made for "all's well that ends well", however, I do think that label will follow Ted, along with our respect for achieving the pinnacle with his fortitude and belief. (It was damn hard to type that....)lol

I've never understood why it is necessary to be told a team is "rebuilding". As a GM, I'm not sure I would ever admit to it as it seems to give the team a built in excuse for low achievement. Besides, I don't think I would ever think of my job in a category like that. All I would be doing is trying to improve the roster to the extent possible, and that would be continuous. For that matter, I guess I would always be rebuilding.

[Tarlam!]

For that matter, I guess I would always be rebuilding. All I would be doing is trying to improve the roster to the extent possible, and that would be continuous.

I swapped these sentences because this is basically what TT has done and said. He's always done and said it.

[wootah]

Not really the same situation.

MN in their offer to Hutchinson said that if he wasn't the highest paid lineman on Seattle than the full $49M was guaranteed. SEA had just signed Jones their All-World LT to more. So for SEA to keep Hutchinson they would have had to guarantee the whole 7 year $49M contract even if Hutch got hurt or play dropped off. No team could resign their players with that clause in the the contract.

Maybe that leason taught TT to extend his core players before their contracts have expired.

I should have made it more clear; I didn't mean the situation where Hutch left for the Vikings, but just the fact that TT will value a guard high enough that he will draft him in the 1st.

[vince]

I've never understood why it is necessary to be told a team is "rebuilding". As a GM, I'm not sure I would ever admit to it as it seems to give the team a built in excuse for low achievement. Besides, I don't think I would ever think of my job in a category like that. All I would be doing is trying to improve the roster to the extent possible, and that would be continuous. For that matter, I guess I would always be rebuilding.

QFT

[RashanGary]

Whatever Ted does, he's the reigning champ. He's going to get the benefit of the doubt from upper management, fans and coaches alike.

I'd say the odds of keeping Sitton are between 90 and 95 percent. What he's saying is true. He's expressing how he feels about his play and about playing for the Packers. It's a good, honest intent by my estimation.

Guys like this, reasonable ones who aren't afraid to say how they feel. . . . They tend to be willing to compromise. Ted has a history of paying guys very well for their play/reliability. Sitton is a guy who's high in both. He'll get locked up. My guess is some time shortly after the season starts and things get in order after the lockout.

Again, odds are very high Sitton will be here. His attitude, the Packers attitude lead me to believe that. I felt the same way about Collins. Good guy, great player, great attitude. . . Paid near the top of his position, but not over. That's what Sitton will get. 2nd or 3rd highest paid guard in the NFL and he'll get the contract early. The Packers take the risk of signing him early and risking injury for a year and save a few dollars from letting him get to UFA. Sitton gets the security of an early contract and gets paid near the top of his position anyway. Win/Win.

[Tarlam!]

Good post, JH.

[Patler]

I don't think Sitton will be signed early in the season. I think TT will take some time to evaluate the readiness of others to step in for him if he were to leave next year. If TT really learned from Wolf, Wolf was of the opinion that guard was not a position to invest a lot of money in. He felt the same way about punters (but later admitted to regretting letting Hentrich go). Wolf changed his starting guard combination almost every year, and let young, top notch guards leave rather than give them a second contract. Wolf drafted a guard in the first round, then let him leave at the end of his rookie contract.

The Packers don't usually sign someone early for anywhere close to the top salaries at their positions. Within the top 15, yes, but usually in the 8-15 area. If you are going to give him a big contract a year early, it should save some money and take it out of the top 5. If not, you might as well wait until later and get another cheap year before re-signing him.

I think Sitton could be back with the Pack, but not if he wants to be among the 3 or 4 highest paid guards in the league. If he can be satisfied somewhat lower than that, he could be re-signed. TT won't be cheap in what he offers, but he won't be one to test the top pay for the position either.

[vince]

I think Sitton will become one of the top paid guards in the league - for now. Similar to Rodgers, Williams, etc., in a couple years, he will again be a relative bargain.

[Patler]

I think Sitton will become one of the top paid guards in the league - for now. Similar to Rodgers, Williams, etc., in a couple years, he will again be a relative bargain.

That will cost the Packers $7 million/year or more. Jahre Evans signed last year for $8 million/year over 7 years, with $19 million guaranteed. Hutchinson, Dockery, Steinbach, and Davis are signed to deals for $7 million/year. Steinbach had 17 million guaranteed, Davis $16 million.
T

[vince]

That will cost the Packers $7 million/year or more. Jahre Evans signed last year for $8 million/year over 7 years, with $19 million guaranteed. Hutchinson, Dockery, Steinbach, and Davis are signed to deals for $7 million/year. Steinbach had 17 million guaranteed, Davis $16 million.
T

$7 mil/yr. sounds about right to me.

[RashanGary]

$7 mil/yr. sounds about right to me.

Me too. Sitton is a stud. Shit, if you can replace guards, move him to RT. I'll bet he'd be in the top 2 or 3 RT's in the league too. Big, good feet, nasty, consistent. I don't think he'd be a bad LT if you wanted to put him there.

In order, his best positions are probably:

RG, RT, LG, LT, C

I don't think he'd be bad at any of them and probably great at three of them.