Willis Value

[sharpe1027]

That's a nice rhetorical touch, but the Packers would only care about the compensation, not whether the Raiders see him as the next evolution of long snapper.

We've only had one game with Willis and Love both dressed out, so we haven't seen what our offense will do with both of them together. Will they have Malik QB Power packages drawn up? Will MLF go the Full Taysom with both Willis and Love in the huddle? Would he be our FG holder? You're not gonna see Love and Sean Clifford on the field together, but Malik would either waste opposing DCs' planning time or offer something completely unexpected in a crucial drive. So he could be more to us than just a backup if that's what he and MLF want.

Agreed on the added value. This is the exact discussion I had with someone asking my opinion on the situation yesterday.

If the Raiders thought he was a starter, it makes sense that they would offer trade value representing that fact. Why do you think that is rhetorical?

I recognize it's possible no other team values him enough to offer enough that the Packers bite. I just think the QB position is valued so high that's unlikely if someone sees him as a starter.

[MadtownPacker]

You math doesn’t use common sense. Packers got lucky on a quality backup and look at that had to use him less than a month later. ADD in the winning and I think he has to stay. If he get away later and Packers get nothing, well that’s kinda how insurance works. That’s pretty much what he is. Insurance to keep the team contending while Love is in the shop. If a team does some dumb shit and offers a very high pick maybe but I would say his value to the Pack is very high. Let him best MN and we might have a different story next week.

[bobblehead]

Doesn't willis have a year left? Wouldn't we maximize his value if he balls out in fake games for a second year after the way he performed in the previous 2 games? No reason to trade him now unless you actually believe it was a fluke and he will look bad next spring.

[sharpe1027]

To me, it's as simple as whether you think another team might see him as a starter. If yes, then the Packers could receive an offer that's consistent with the value higher than the value of a pure backup.

If they receive this offer, then next year (not this year) they'd be stupid not to seriously consider the offer.

Seems pretty common sense to me.

[Fritz]

To me, it's as simple as whether you think another team might see him as a starter. If yes, then the Packers could receive an offer that's consistent with the value higher than the value of a pure backup.

If they receive this offer, then next year (not this year) they'd be stupid not to seriously consider the offer.

Seems pretty common sense to me.

So what does a team offer after this season, if they see Willis as a starter? Any prospective trade partner will have, if we Packer fans are lucky, only two regular-season games this year upon which to judge the guy. But let's say they think he's a starter. How much would a team be willing to give up for a guy with a limited track record of success who they'll need to sign to a longer-term, big-paying contract pretty much right away?

If you're the Packers, would a mid-to-late first round pick be enough? You're then without a backup, so, given what Guter has publicly said, you're going to draft another rookie, and likely not in the seventh round range again. So maybe fourth or fifth? For an unknown quantity? And that first - what does that get you? Quay Walker or Devonte Wyatt?

Of course they'll entertain offers. If someone really wants to give up a first - which I'm not sure at all would be the case - the Packers would have to weigh that. But given that they'll get a compensatory pick in two years, and probably a fairly high one, given that in your own metrics someone will sign him to a big deal, why not just have him for two years, and get that third round pick at the end of it all?

[sharpe1027]

I don't understand the compensatory argument coupled with the argument nobody would give much in trade. It seems internally inconsistent. I think the ompensatory formula ranks players based on the size of their contract and the number of snaps they played. Willis hopefully won't have a lot of snaps.

I don't know what other teams value him at, but if they are going to give him a huge contract necessary to trigger a higher compensatory pick, they would probably send a high pick to not have to wait an entire year and to kick the tires on him before committing to a huge contract.

[Fritz]

I thought the formula has become more weighted toward the contract.

But why not, if you're the Packers, wait until the end of this year and see if anyone wants to take the kind of risk it would be to trade a first for a mostly-unproven guy who'd be getting a big contract right away.

[bobblehead]

So what does a team offer after this season, if they see Willis as a starter? Any prospective trade partner will have, if we Packer fans are lucky, only two regular-season games this year upon which to judge the guy. But let's say they think he's a starter. How much would a team be willing to give up for a guy with a limited track record of success who they'll need to sign to a longer-term, big-paying contract pretty much right away?

If you're the Packers, would a mid-to-late first round pick be enough? You're then without a backup, so, given what Guter has publicly said, you're going to draft another rookie, and likely not in the seventh round range again. So maybe fourth or fifth? For an unknown quantity? And that first - what does that get you? Quay Walker or Devonte Wyatt?

Of course they'll entertain offers. If someone really wants to give up a first - which I'm not sure at all would be the case - the Packers would have to weigh that. But given that they'll get a compensatory pick in two years, and probably a fairly high one, given that in your own metrics someone will sign him to a big deal, why not just have him for two years, and get that third round pick at the end of it all?

If he balls out in the spring next year (he did this year, showing growth, add in the last 2 games) then I could easily see a 2nd. Alex smith was much older with limited upside and he went for a 2nd. Jimmy G had a little more experience, but also somewhat less upside to willis and I think he went for a 2nd.

[sharpe1027]

I thought the formula has become more weighted toward the contract.

But why not, if you're the Packers, wait until the end of this year and see if anyone wants to take the kind of risk it would be to trade a first for a mostly-unproven guy who'd be getting a big contract right away.

You absolutely wait until after this year. That's what I've been saying all along.

I don't agree with people saying there's no way we get offered enough to make a trade make sense next year. I think it's quite possible, but not guaranteed.

[Fritz]

So for you, if Bobble’s right and someone offers a second rounder next spring, say mid-second, do you take it?

[bobblehead]

So for you, if Bobble’s right and someone offers a second rounder next spring, say mid-second, do you take it?

You hope Pratt advances enough to be a backup and you take it. If you have no other options maybe not.

[texaspackerbacker]

Do we even still have Pratt? I thought somebody else signed him.

Willis is decent, but his quality level is inflated by the fact that the whole team is loaded. Great if we can get a fairly high pick for him. I doubt it would be a 1 or 2. Just keep him around until he needs to get paid too much. Then let him go - finding an adequate back up isn't that hard to do, especially if you consider the unlikelihood that the back up would get much use.

[run pMc]

Pratt signed with Tampa. Clifford in on GB's PS.
Agree you keep Willis this year, see what you have with him after a full offseason in MLF's playbook, and if someone bowls you over with an offer, take it. I'm also assuming they draft another QB or make another corresponding move. Clifford basically exceeded expectations last year because everyone hated the pick and thought he was a UDFA, this year he showed no growth and possibly regression with higher expectations. I think he is what he is and you like him as a QB3 but will look for better at backup.

If Willis never plays another meaningful regular season snap for GB and his contract expires, he either signs with GB or nets them a comp pick by signing with another team. It's certainly possible some team becomes enamored with him and offers a Day 2 pick, but I think that's unlikely.

For this year, he's good enough insurance. He's more likely to play mistake free than Clifford, based off recent play, and that's about all you can ask of a backup (i.e., not to lose a game with a bad mistake)

[sharpe1027]

He only nets a compensatory pick if he gets a large contract and we don't sign anyone ourselves to cancel his departure out

[sharpe1027]

So for you, if Bobble’s right and someone offers a second rounder next spring, say mid-second, do you take it?

Absolutely.