Danny Trevathen "wishes" Green Bay had called him

[Joemailman]

The fact that he ended up signing with his former coach might lend credence to the argument that he is a "system" player. I was a little surprised that the Bears were able to sign him as quickly as they did for what seems to be reasonable money. That might suggest the demand for him wasn't as high as we had been led to believe. He's a good player, but it seems teams didn't see him as elite.

[Joemailman]

6M per year is low-end starter money for Trevathen. A fair price, and more importantly helps set the price for guys like Jerrell Freeman or Demario Davis.

It's not low end starter money. His average salary of 6.125M makes him the 11th highest paid ILB, and the 33rd highest paid LB. By the time his contract is over, he'll likely be a bit lower on the list, but it's still puts him in the upper third of starting LB's.

[3irty1]

It's not low end starter money. His average salary of 6.125M makes him the 11th highest paid ILB, and the 33rd highest paid LB. By the time his contract is over, he'll likely be a bit lower on the list, but it's still puts him in the upper third of starting LB's.

True, but that's not the measure I'd use as it includes players on rookie contacts who aren't making market value. The average NFL player should make 155M/53 = ~3M. Any given roster will have about 20 guys on rookie contracts averaging 800k each for a total of 16M. So for free agency purposes, the average NFL player ought to make about 139/33 = ~4.2M. Only about half of that 33 are starters, so that's how I arrived at calling 6M per year low-end starter money.

[KYPack]

Danny is a good hand out there on the field. Did we want to replace CMIII as an ILB by paying his replacement top dollar? Probably not. We treat our ILB's as pluggers, they need to be in position and make the plays. We just don't have effective ILB's without Clay in there. The Packers want to get two effective middle guys and move Clay back to a play making spot. Laying out top dollars for a guy like Danny just didn't add up to our financial equation.

The Bears didn't get a second Erlacher, they got Danny Trevathan.

[RonWolfGOAT]

Plus the cap will continue to increase each year.

[Striker]

The amount of mental gymnastics some of you do to defend TT is mind boggling.

He says with the username RonWolfGOAT while really only participating in posts that rip on the GM.

No axe to grind here folks. Not at all. Or bias either.

[Striker]

Danny is a good hand out there on the field. Did we want to replace CMIII as an ILB by paying his replacement top dollar? Probably not. We treat our ILB's as pluggers, they need to be in position and make the plays. We just don't have effective ILB's without Clay in there. The Packers want to get two effective middle guys and move Clay back to a play making spot. Laying out top dollars for a guy like Danny just didn't add up to our financial equation.

The Bears didn't get a second Erlacher, they got Danny Trevathan.

^^^^

Ding ding ding.

[RonWolfGOAT]

He says with the username RonWolfGOAT while only participating in posts that rip on the GM.

No axe to grind here folks. Not at all. Or bias either.

A forum is for discussion. In a discussion, you bring your biases.

[Striker]

This is the kinda stuff that really lends creedence to those in the Anti-Ted camp. It's not that we didn't sign him. It's that the number 1 FA at the pack's number 1 position of need was interested in playing here. And Ted made no effort to even converse with him.

Well, generally the GM won't call a player directly. Russ Ball could have talked to his agent, checked on price, and that was it (during the "legal tampering period" and what not). And Trevathan would be none the wiser.

[Striker]

A forum is for discussion. In a discussion, you bring your biases.

A discussion only exists when those participating don't cherry pick what they reply to.

[Deputy Nutz]

Danny is a good hand out there on the field. Did we want to replace CMIII as an ILB by paying his replacement top dollar? Probably not. We treat our ILB's as pluggers, they need to be in position and make the plays. We just don't have effective ILB's without Clay in there. The Packers want to get two effective middle guys and move Clay back to a play making spot. Laying out top dollars for a guy like Danny just didn't add up to our financial equation.

The Bears didn't get a second Erlacher, they got Danny Trevathan.

You didn't have an effective inside linebacker with Clay. The Packers were smart to move him back outside.

[pbmax]

You didn't have an effective inside linebacker with Clay. The Packers were smart to move him back outside.

You are still forgetting the opportunity cost. The replacement ILB was far worse than the replacement OLB.

[Deputy Nutz]

I don't think so. Clay gets double digit sacks on the edge and does a decent job on containing the run seems to tackle better on the edge to. The question, is Nick Perry a better outside linebacker than Sam Barrington is an inside linebacker?

[Fritz]

The amount of mental gymnastics some of you do to defend TT is mind boggling.

It wasn't that difficult.

[pbmax]

I don't think so. Clay gets double digit sacks on the edge and does a decent job on containing the run seems to tackle better on the edge to. The question, is Nick Perry a better outside linebacker than Sam Barrington is an inside linebacker?

There are two ILBs. Barrington is one. Perry is a better OLB than the next ILB. Has been true since Hawk declined and Bishop got wrecked.

Hell, he might be better than Barrington too.

Perry is a better run defender on the outside than Clay. More reliable and a better edge. Clay can chase from weak side and penetrate. But he guesses wrong and can be fooled (see any 49er game). Perry rarely gets sucked inside and stays in his gap. Matthews can get to more plays, but I am not sure he is a better tackler.