Is having four starting caliber defensive tackles a problem?

[RashanGary]

It seems like there is a growing sentiment that we should unload one of our plentifull defensive tackles. The main reasons that I see sited are:

1. We still would still have three good DT's and a fourth who is a capable backup (Pickett, Jolly, Harrell and Cole as the capable backup). Basically, Williams doesn't bring much extra to our team.
2. We should be able to fix a need with either a draft pick or the player that Williams fetches us

I don't think we should press for a trade. Nutz recently mentioned that NFL vets don't typically fetch more than a 3rd round pick unless they are all-pros. If you look at recent history, this is true. Realisticlly, we are not going to get equal value for Corey Williams. We drafted and developed him, I think we should reap the benfits that were sown and I think we can.

I made a rotation chart that shows how we might be able to take advantage of our current defensive line talent. Take any situation like 1st and goal at the one or 4th and 26 at the 30 and consider whether it's run, pass or more of a base situation. Some situations might fall somewhere in the middle so use your judgement. If you think it's all run then go down the far left of the chart and out pops the defensive line rotation. It would be nice to have Kampman, Williams, Pickett and Jenkins on every play but you need to rest your starters and the goal is to rest the starters while still getting situationally effective play from start to end.


RDE

RUN--------10----------20----------30----------40-----BASE-----60----------70-----------80----------90--------PASS __________________________________________________ _________________________________________
I--------Williams 25%---------I---------------Jenkins 40%---------------I-----------------KGB 35%------------------I


RDT

RUN--------10----------20----------30----------40-----BASE-----60----------70-----------80----------90--------PASS
__________________________________________________ _________________________________________
I-----------Jolly 25%-----------I------------Harrell 35%-----------I-----------Williams 30%-------------I-Jenks 10%I



LDT

RUN--------10----------20----------30----------40-----BASE-----60----------70-----------80----------90--------PASS __________________________________________________ _________________________________________
I---------------------------Pickett 60%------------------------------I--------------Jolly 30%-------------I-Wilms 10%-I



LDE

RUN--------10----------20----------30----------40-----BASE-----60----------70-----------80----------90--------PASS
__________________________________________________ _________________________________________
I-Harel 10%I--Jenkins 15%--I---------------------------------------Kampan 75%-------------------------------------I



The coaches have a better idea of how to use their guys. However, I think this chart shows that it is possible to get good, win contributing results from all of the lineman we have on our roster. If you have one weak link (Cole or Montgomery) or a tired player, it becomes a lot easier to stop the other three. Give up Williams and add in one injury and now we have run down, tired defensive line, especially in fourth quarter. We'll lose games that we could have won right at the end when it hurts most. Without the deep defensive line, I think this defense is somewhere on the good end of average. With the current defensive line, I think they can control the time of possession from whistle to whistle and get stops in the fourth quarter when it matters most. I'm not willing to give that up for pennies on the dollar.

[BallHawk]

I only count 3 starting caliber DTs.

However, is having depth a problem? Absolutely not. Quite the contrary. It allows you to keep your lineman fresher and makes you flexible in the event of an injury. Also, the option of a trade is always there.

[Merlin]

I got:

Picket
Cole
Jenkins
Montgomery (Depending on the day)

Harrell isn't even close to beating our backup to the backup offensive linemen.

[The Leaper]

I don't see too much depth. Harrell isn't going to make a major impact in 2007, and Jolly also is going to see limited action inside. Pickett and Williams are reliable starters.

To be honest, depth at DT actually could be a huge bonus...as it could prevent us from having to move Jenkins inside in passing situations all the time, which should help make him more effective throughout an entire game.

Personally, I'd like to see Jolly be given a chance at DE. It sounds like he has developed a few pass rushing moves that he could utilize out there...and he probably is a better all-around DE than Montgomery is.

[BlueBrewer]

I got:

Picket
Cole
Jenkins
Montgomery (Depending on the day)

Harrell isn't even close to beating our backup to the backup offensive linemen.

Corey Williams!

[oregonpackfan]

Too much depth is not a problem. It seems like Harrell is having difficulty adjusting to the pro level.

Montgomery may be gone by the time the season begins.

[RashanGary]

Re: Is having four starting caliber defensive tackles a prob

I've heard more and more sentiment to unload Williams. Maybe it's just a select few because everyone here seems happy with depth.

[Freak Out]

Now is not the time to unload anybody on the D-line.....that time may come but I think it's much to early to trade any of them.

[RashanGary]

Now is not the time to unload anybody on the D-line.....that time may come but I think it's much to early to trade any of them.

I agree. Next year we might find that we have a bunch of REALLY good ones, but at that time Pickett will be in the last two years of his contract so we have to prepare for his day to come as well.

[The Leaper]

Re: Is having four starting caliber defensive tackles a prob

I made a rotation chart that shows how we might be able to take advantage of our current defensive line talent.

I agree on how things can be divided up. Having depth to give Kampman and Jenkins time to rest is a luxury that will pay dividends. With the depth we have, none of our guys should have to be on the field much more than 70% of the time...which will really wear down the opposing OL.

The one area we need to develop someone is behind Kampman. That is where I'd love to see the Packers give Jolly a chance to shine if what he is showing in camp so far also shows up on the field the first game or two of preseason.

[Partial]

It is a bad thing if you need to allocate too much money to one position for players that aren't on the field enough to make a big impact.

We have 5 good guys. That is a lot. I would say 4 would have a good chance at cracking 25-30 rosters.

[The Leaper]

It is a bad thing if you need to allocate too much money to one position for players that aren't on the field enough to make a big impact.

True...if you don't have much room in cap space.

However, we currently have plenty of cap space, so there is no reason to jettison talent at any position for purposes of money. A year or two down the line, that may become more of an issue for Green Bay.

[RashanGary]

It is a bad thing if you need to allocate too much money to one position for players that aren't on the field enough to make a big impact.

We have 5 good guys. That is a lot. I would say 4 would have a good chance at cracking 25-30 rosters.

Kampman, Jenkins and Pickett combined are equal to Freeney alone. We dont' have that much tied up. Leaper also mentioned the cap space. People make the mistake of assuming cap management means not spending at all when that is not the case. It means spending wisely to win. Signing Williams helps us win more than it costs us so it is a good move. The problem is when a players impact is smaller than his cap hit. Those are the bad moves.

As far as Cole is concerned, we'll have to agree to disagree. I think he's a below average player and just having him on the field makes it easier for offenses to attack our good dlineman.

[Bretsky]

Re: Is having four starting caliber defensive tackles a prob

I've heard more and more sentiment to unload Williams. Maybe it's just a select few because everyone here seems happy with depth.

Unloading Williams is just pure bullsh@t IMO. Depth at the DL position is a necessity and it's not like we are the Bears as is.

Being the TT questioner I will admit that one of the first thougts I had when I heard Harrell's name drafted was TT doesn't want to pay Williams

[Bretsky]

It is a bad thing if you need to allocate too much money to one position for players that aren't on the field enough to make a big impact.

We have 5 good guys. That is a lot. I would say 4 would have a good chance at cracking 25-30 rosters.

Kampman, Jenkins and Pickett combined are equal to Freeney alone. We dont' have that much tied up. Leaper also mentioned the cap space. People make the mistake of assuming cap management means not spending at all when that is not the case. It means spending wisely to win. Signing Williams helps us win more than it costs us so it is a good move. The problem is when a players impact is smaller than his cap hit. Those are the bad moves.

As far as Cole is concerned, we'll have to agree to disagree. I think he's a below average player and just having him on the field makes it easier for offenses to attack our good dlineman.

Cole IMO is a borderline player. He's not starter caliber. Jolly is to be determined.

I have no problems if TT thinks he has enough depth to trade a DL for a player who will help now; no excused for letting Williams go via free agency though.