Why Can't the Pack Fit Shields, Et Al, Under the Cap?

[Patler]

From things I have read, I think he is still viewed by some as weak in run support and inconsistent in coverage. I think he has improved a lot in both areas, but many of those who put out these lists are still working on their earlier perceptions of him.

[pbmax]

I think calling Shields a shutdown corner is pretty liberal use of the term. He's very good against the type that makes a living on beating you deep but only solid starter in every other regard IMO.

He is not an especially solid starter on big, physical receivers, but he also doesn't get shoved around as much as Tramon. In the North there are plenty of match ups for him that are ideal (either deep threats or guys who alternate deep with crossing routes (his speed lets him catch those guys with ease).

There are better companion corners than Tramon for him, but the Packers track record there is such that I think they get that guy during his next contract if its not Hayward or House. I would spend the the money on the tier below Top 5. Top 10 yes. He is the Jennings of CBs.

[pbmax]

Am I crazy to think this deal is a deal for the Packers? Guaranteed money seems reasonable if you are thinking about the Tag for two years and the upfront money could be broken up to hit the cap in different years.

But a source familiar with Rosenhaus said the basis for the deal Shields wants is the four-year, $22.4 million contract Chicago Bears cornerback Tim Jennings signed in January. More than half of Jennings' deal is guaranteed and the first-year compensation is more than $8 million.

Read more from Journal Sentinel: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...#ixzz2u44tU3Tt
Follow us: @JournalSentinel on Twitter

[Joemailman]

Am I crazy to think this deal is a deal for the Packers? Guaranteed money seems reasonable if you are thinking about the Tag for two years and the upfront money could be broken up to hit the cap in different years.

If that's the case, I'd be shocked if it doesn't get done. That would be similar money to what Morgan Burnett got.

[pbmax]

If that's the case, I'd be shocked if it doesn't get done. That would be similar money to what Morgan Burnett got.

Silverstein goes on to say that the Packers seem reluctant to go over $8.5 mil in a year as they view Tramon as the #1 CB at that number. I think we on this board value Shields more than his agent and the Packers.

[mraynrand]

Silverstein goes on to say that the Packers seem reluctant to go over $8.5 mil in a year as they view Tramon as the #1 CB at that number. I think we on this board value Shields more than his agent and the Packers.

I do. Shields has demonstrated the ability to cover like Deion Sanders. If he had consistency and wasn't injury prone, he would be the best cover corner in football. Perhaps the Packers view him as topped out where he is.

[smuggler]

4/24 is not bad at all. Fucking get it done.

[mraynrand]

4/24 is not bad at all. Fucking get it done.

+1

[Guiness]

4/22.4? Sub-6M/year for four years??? Have to think if that's the number, it gets done. Considering the franchise tag is over $10M for a cb, I thought he'd be looking for a lot closer to an average of AT LEAST 10M/year on a deal that long.

Tramon might still be the Pack's #1 CB, but unless I'm really missing something, Shields is damn good too. Maybe the Pack is unwilling to spend $15m/year on that position, but they paid Harris and Woodson top dollars when they deserved it, no reason not to go there again.

[pbmax]

Scuttlebutt is that the overall numbers are low because the guaranteed number, and early money are very high. Shields might have higher averages but less guaranteed.

[mraynrand]

Scuttlebutt is that the overall numbers are low because the guaranteed number, and early money are very high. Shields might have higher averages but less guaranteed.

???

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

4 yr/24mil would be a fair deal for both sides. With the cap potentially going all the way up to 130 mil, letting Shields go would be a mistake especially if that number is true.

[bobblehead]

Am I crazy to think this deal is a deal for the Packers? Guaranteed money seems reasonable if you are thinking about the Tag for two years and the upfront money could be broken up to hit the cap in different years.

I think i would ink sam to that exact deal, and I don't care if it is front loaded. Personally I might be higher on Sam, but a lot has to do with his SF game LAST year, and the Cincinatti game this year. He plays big when he is challenged, and I think he is easily worth taht deal.

[pbmax]

???

Meaning that even if, by injury or skill or cap mismanagement, Jennings only survives the first two years, will see the majority of his total $24 mi.

The team is protected with cheap years on the backend, but that is a benefit to them that includes a substantial portion of the risk.

[Guiness]

I think i would ink sam to that exact deal, and I don't care if it is front loaded. Personally I might be higher on Sam, but a lot has to do with his SF game LAST year, and the Cincinatti game this year. He plays big when he is challenged, and I think he is easily worth taht deal.

Kind of my thinking too. I can't see the Packers caring too much about a front loaded deal, they tend to take a long view of things and 4/24, regardless of where the money is, makes sense. One concern with that type of a deal though, is that the player might see low annual salaries in the later years and get a 'what have you done for me lately' attitude.