Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

rbens06 November mock

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rbens06


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 807
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 4:44 pm    Post subject: rbens06 November mock Reply with quote

Season
The Pack pick up the pace and end the season with a 11-5 record and bring some momentum into the playoffs riding it all the way to a Superbowl win!

Cap
Based on what I could find the Pack have $7,939,745 million to rollover into next season. I am going to guess the cap goes to $145 million in 2015 (which is only a slightly higher percentage jump from 2013 to 2014) and with active contracts/dead money for 2015 at $120,254,952 the Pack have $24,745,048 million in cap space plus the rollover for a total of $32,684,793 in available room

Resign
QB Matt Flynn Another year to compete as a backup is ok with Flynn. 1 year around league minimum. Cap goes down by $1 million
QB Scott Tolzien Tolzien hopefully shows some in season growth (more mentally) and can give some hope he can be the backup for the next few seasons. 2 year deal worth $2 million. Cap goes down by $750,000
FB John Kuhn Kuhnís days are limited, but I think they still bring him back until they have a guy in place. He may not make the final cut, but I think he is initially brought back. 1 year $1 million. Cap goes down by $1 million
WR Randall Cobb Cobb has been electric as a receiver and a returner during his time here and he is someone I think we cannot afford to lose. Instead of the second, shorter contract TT usually offers WRs he gives him a longer 5 year deal with a max value of $42 million. Cap goes down by $6 million
OT Bryan Bulaga Bulaga just needs to stay healthy. Hopefully this knee injury is just a hiccup and he starts the rest of the year. However, because of injuries his value is hurt some and he signs a shorter deal, 4 years at $18 million deal with injury clauses in it and incentives. Cap goes down by $3 million
NT BJ Raji I was hoping the loss of Raji would not have been a huge loss, which it still might not, but it looks like it was bigger than made out to be. Raji gets another prove it deal since the market still cannot gauge him. He signs a 1 year $3 million deal. Cap goes down by $3 million
CB Davon House House has shown flashes of being a solid player/starter for us, but he has yet to put together a full season of that type of play. He signs a 3 year $11 million deal. Definitely might be on the lower side, but unless he supplants Williams/Shields at some point in the season I donít see him getting big money from us. Cap goes down by $4 million

Cap goes down by $18.75 million to $13.934 million

Not Retained
CB Jarrett Bush Special teams ace, yes, but for the money he might want we go younger and cheaper to try and fill that role.
DE/NT Letroy Guion I donít see him lasting more than this season unless he picks up his play.
CB Tramon Williams I actually want to see Williams back, but I donít think the money is going to be there and with House, Hayward and even Hyde as guys to step up the loss might not be too bad.
ILB Jamari Lattimore I like Lattimore, especially as a depth and special teams guy, but I donít think the money is there for him to be a backup (assuming the staff sticks with Jones throughout the year). Also, hopefully guys like Barrington and Bradford can step up their play and provide us that depth and special teams play. If the money works out and we could get him around a 2 year $4 million deal I would not mind that. Also, I think there is a chance Lattimore could be a guy we donít initially bring back, but later into free agency we strike a deal.
DuJuan Harris Harris isnít a bad number three back, but with Lacy and Starks getting pretty much all the work getting cheaper and younger isnít a bad idea. Plus it gives us a chance to get a different return man too.

Restricted Free Agents
*I will use last yearís numbers for the tenders for now.
OT Don Barclay Moving forward if/when Barclay is healthy he can provide the line with a lot of flexibility and value on gamedays, so he gets a second round tender too. Cap goes down by $2.187 million
S Sean Richardson[i] Richardson is going to be a backup/special teams guy for us only, so the Pack do not tender him, but bring him back at league minimum. [i]Cap goes down by $750,000
WR Jarrett Boykin Boykin has clearly fallen from the third receiver spot and a with Janis developing, Dorsey being promoted and getting in early and Abbredaris coming back from injury I donít think the Packers put up the tender money to retain him. I donít think Boykin is a bad depth guy to have, but I think our younger receivers are more talented.

Cap goes down by $2.937 million to $10.997 million

I will just conservatively estimate $5.5 million for the draft class. Cap goes down by $5.5 million to $5.497 million

***I know itís not a ton of cap space left, but in addition to this the team can save a significant amount of space by cutting both Peppers and Jones. Also seeing that guys like Kuhn and either Tolzien/Flynn are not locks to make it we have some flexibility to be more than ok moving forward.

Draft
I am going to have some optimism that we will get two 5th round compensatory picks.

1. Arik Armstead DE Oregon 6í8 290lbs

Armstead doesnít have a ton of production yet, as this is his first full year as a starter, but his size and skill-set make him an intriguing prospect. He has a massive frame with natural power that makes him an ideal fit in the 3-4. He also shows pretty good feet for a guy his size. I think he can be a guy that can add a good pass rush from the defensive end position. Jones has not really shown he is going to hold the spot and Daniels is not best suited for the base defense, plus he is getting close to free agency (I am not saying we donít bring him back, but you never know what will happen). He has a pretty high ceiling too.

2. Shaq Thompson LB Washington 6í1 228lbs

Thompson is definitely on the rise and might have, if he hasnít already, played his way to a much higher pick. To call Thompson a good athlete is an understatement. He has played several positions, both offense and defense, and excelled at all of them. He played significant time as a nickel back his freshman year and has been a productive linebacker last year and this year. The thing that has stood out is that Thompson has made a lot of impact plays and turnovers at big moments. He has the athleticism to stay in coverage and the speed to make plays all over the field. Getting bigger/stronger and becoming more aware as a linebacker will continue his development. I like Thompson as a good piece next to Hawk as Thompson shows the ability as someone that can be our 3 down linebacker and add some spark to the middle of the defense.

3. Ben Koyack TE Notre Dame 6í5 254lbs

Koyack is not as flashy of an athlete that his predecessors, Eifert and Niklas, were coming out of Notre Dame, but he can be a solid tightend. He does a good job of blocking, which I think may be more important moving forward, and he can be a good, safe outlet for Rodgers. I like Rodgers potential moving forward, but I donít know if Quarless will last that much longer. Someone that can be a good all around tightend and provide good depth will help.

4. Tyler Sambrailo Colorado State 6í5 315lbs

I donít know if this pick is really necessary, as it seems. If we bring Bulaga back, Barclay comes back healthy and with Tretter as a possibility I donít know if another OL is needed, but value and versatility prevail here. Position flexibility is key for Sambrailo and this pick. He has done a good job at left tackle this year for Colorado State, but has the ability to play guard or right tackle too. I like the demeanor Sambrailo plays with and think that with time in the weight room and developing against our pass rushers in practice he has the potential to be a guy in a year or two for us, which could really come at any position but center.

5. David Cobb RB Minnesota 5í11 220lbs

Cobb is a tough, physical runner that will get the tough yards. He is a big part of Minnesotaís recent resurgence in the Big10 and has put up good numbers for the past 1 Ĺ seasons, since he became the starter. He lacks elite speed and does have some ball security issues, but he does a good job at hitting the hole and making sure he falls forward. He doesnít have a ton of catches, but he has been used some in the passing game and has ability there too. I like the Lacy/Starks combo, but Starks is creeping towards 30 and getting someone else in the mix will help keep Lacy fresh and hopefully extend his career a little.

5. Wes Saxton TE South Alabama 6í5 240lbs

Saxton is really the type of athlete at tightend that we do not have this year. He is a guy that can create mismatches and be a good threat in the receiving game. I like that he has experience as a tightend, slot guy and H-back. The versatility is something that can add some flexibility to our roster. He looks to have a good field presence and does a good job catching the ball. His size, blocking ability and competition level will hurt him, but at this point I risk that for the athleticism he can bring.

5. Eric Murray CB Minnesota 6í0 195lbs

Murray played well last year and has been good this year too. I think his physical nature may appeal to teams and bump him up the board a little, but if he makes it here I like the value. He is a tough corner that is not afraid to get up on the receiver. He also does a good job staying with his guy and shows the ability to play both man and zone. He also is pretty willing to come up and help against the run. He doesnít have elite speed and doesnít make as many plays on the ball as I would like, but as someone we can bring in and develop he has good skills to work with.

6. Devonte Fields DE/OLB Trinity Valley Community College (Formerly TCU)

Odds are this pick doesnít happen, but itís the late flyer that I would like TT to make. There is a good chance that Fields transfers to another FBS school to try to regain some of his stock, but if that doesnít happen the NFL is tempting to pass on for another JUCO season. Fields has flashed first round potential on the field, off the field issues were a problem and put him where he is at. He is a natural athlete that has good quickness and speed. He has shown the ability to be a good speed rusher and bend/dip on the outside. However, he was more of a one trick pony type player that relied heavily on that speed and athleticism. Adding some muscle and developing his pass rushing technique will make him a more complete player. At this point in the draft taking the chance on a guy like Fields is something I think we can afford to do.

7. Mark Weisman FB/RB 6í0 240lbs Iowa

I view this more as a John Kuhn 2.0 pick. Weisman is a hard nose, power runner that will get you tough yards. He doesnít have a lot of speed or wiggle to him, but much like Kuhn I think he can be a versatile guy. Also like Kuhn he probably will not be an elite lead blocker, but can do a serviceable job and provide a good short yardage guy (if for some reason we continue to not use Lacy in those spots). He doesnít have a ton of catches, but I think he can be a reliable guy out of the back field and if he can pick up the blitzes he can provide us with that utility guy. Overall, I think he gives us the chance to add a similar type of player as Kuhn, but much younger and cheaper.

Depth Chart
Offense
QB: Rodgers, Flynn
RB: Lacy, Starks, Cobb
FB: Kuhn, Weisman
WR: Nelson, Cobb, Adams, Janis, Abbredaris, Dorsey
TE: Rodgers, Koyack, Saxton, Quarless
OT: Bakhtiari, Bulaga, Barclay, Sambrailo
OG: Sitton, Lang
OC: Linsley, Tretter
Offense Total: 25
Defense
DE: Jones, Daniels, Armstead, Thornton, Robinson
NT: Raji, Boyd
OLB: Matthews, Peppers, Neal, Perry, Fields
ILB: Hawk, Thompson, Barrington, Bradford
CB: Shields, House, Hayward, Murray, Goodson
S: Burnett, Clinton-Dix, Hyde, Richardson
Defense Total: 25

K: Crosby
P: Masthay
LS: Goode
Special Teams Total: 3
Team Total: 53

***Roster cuts of Brad Jones and Scott Tolzien save us $4.5 million. Cap goes up by $4.5 million to $9.247 million.


Last edited by rbens06 on Wed Nov 05, 2014 9:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 6840
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I haven't watched Armstead souls in 2014 but based on 2013, no me gusts
_________________
Remember who you are dealing with:
AaronCharles wrote:
I have to say, I see no way we don't start 1-4, with our schedule.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rbens06


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 807
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
I haven't watched Armstead souls in 2014 but based on 2013, no me gusts


I think he is a boom or bust type player, but the size and length he would bring is so unique to this defense. From what I have seen he plays with a lot of natural power and does a good job at driving his guy back. I think there is some potential to work with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dubyajay


Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Posts: 1738
PostPosted: Thu Nov 06, 2014 5:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And if he can't rush, we could transition him into an all-pro OT.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ajhawk5047


Joined: 04 Jan 2007
Posts: 1218
PostPosted: Thu Nov 06, 2014 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dubyajay wrote:
And if he can't rush, we could transition him into an all-pro OT.


oh, is that how it works?
_________________
Go Packers!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2354
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Fri Nov 07, 2014 11:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ajhawk5047 wrote:
Dubyajay wrote:
And if he can't rush, we could transition him into an all-pro OT.


oh, is that how it works?


Not unless you're Seattle(see JR Sweezy).


All fictitious speculation aside, I see no point in drafting two TE's. We drafted D!ckRod to develop and eventually start. Quarless is the reasonable stand-by and Bostick is a guy who could emerge into a solid player if he wants to. I could see us drafting one, not two. Also, Shaq Thompson will best transition to the 4-3 IMHO. I think Eric Kendricks is by far the better fit; not just because I'm high on him, but because he's bigger, faster, stronger, etc.; though that's not to say Shaq is chopped blade steak here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dubyajay


Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Posts: 1738
PostPosted: Sat Nov 08, 2014 7:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ajhawk5047 wrote:
Dubyajay wrote:
And if he can't rush, we could transition him into an all-pro OT.


oh, is that how it works?


A little inside there.

Oregon wanted to transition him to OT when they recruited him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rbens06


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 807
PostPosted: Sat Nov 08, 2014 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NCPackFan wrote:
ajhawk5047 wrote:
Dubyajay wrote:
And if he can't rush, we could transition him into an all-pro OT.


oh, is that how it works?


Not unless you're Seattle(see JR Sweezy).


All fictitious speculation aside, I see no point in drafting two TE's. We drafted D!ckRod to develop and eventually start. Quarless is the reasonable stand-by and Bostick is a guy who could emerge into a solid player if he wants to. I could see us drafting one, not two. Also, Shaq Thompson will best transition to the 4-3 IMHO. I think Eric Kendricks is by far the better fit; not just because I'm high on him, but because he's bigger, faster, stronger, etc.; though that's not to say Shaq is chopped blade steak here.


I can see how two TE may look bad, but I see Saxton more as an H-back player. He has experience there and is someone that can lineup at inline, in the slot or out of the backfield. I agree with Rodgers, but Quarless is on a short deal and may not be back after the deal is up, so a developmental guy is not a bad thing. Plus as much potential as Bostick has sometimes it just never happens on the field. I like the guy and what he can bring, but at some point things just don't progress as you want, so getting a younger and similarily athletic guy makes sense. I just see TT doing what he usually does and draft a position a year ahead of time.

I agree with you on Thompson that he is best for a 4-3, but the reason we draft him that part isn't as much of a concern. Much like Shazier in this past draft I see Thompson as that athletic coverage linebacker. I think he is someone that can cover and fly all over the field for us, but I agree he is better for the 4-3. Also I agree about Kendricks. I actually had Kendricks slated here, and would actually prefer him, but I think Thompson is the more likely guy to fall of the two. Thompson too is still fairly raw for the LB position. He played nickel as a freshman and spelled at RB too, I think focusing on one position could really allow him to fully develop.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2354
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Sun Nov 09, 2014 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rbens06 wrote:

I can see how two TE may look bad, but I see Saxton more as an H-back player. He has experience there and is someone that can lineup at inline, in the slot or out of the backfield. I agree with Rodgers, but Quarless is on a short deal and may not be back after the deal is up, so a developmental guy is not a bad thing. Plus as much potential as Bostick has sometimes it just never happens on the field. I like the guy and what he can bring, but at some point things just don't progress as you want, so getting a younger and similarily athletic guy makes sense. I just see TT doing what he usually does and draft a position a year ahead of time.


Then in that case, why draft Koyack when you can get a multi-functional player later in the draft? I could easily see us bringing Quarless back. Quarless has been solid, not spectacular. I could see him come back for another short, cheap contract.


rbens06 wrote:

I agree with you on Thompson that he is best for a 4-3, but the reason we draft him that part isn't as much of a concern. Much like Shazier in this past draft I see Thompson as that athletic coverage linebacker. I think he is someone that can cover and fly all over the field for us, but I agree he is better for the 4-3. Also I agree about Kendricks. I actually had Kendricks slated here, and would actually prefer him, but I think Thompson is the more likely guy to fall of the two. Thompson too is still fairly raw for the LB position. He played nickel as a freshman and spelled at RB too, I think focusing on one position could really allow him to fully develop.


I too think Kendricks might go before Thompson. Question is where and when. Also, why draft a player THAT raw in the 2nd? Not sure the perceived gamble would be worth it at that point.


Also, I gotta give you major DAP for giving me a detailed answer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rbens06


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 807
PostPosted: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NCPackFan wrote:
rbens06 wrote:

I can see how two TE may look bad, but I see Saxton more as an H-back player. He has experience there and is someone that can lineup at inline, in the slot or out of the backfield. I agree with Rodgers, but Quarless is on a short deal and may not be back after the deal is up, so a developmental guy is not a bad thing. Plus as much potential as Bostick has sometimes it just never happens on the field. I like the guy and what he can bring, but at some point things just don't progress as you want, so getting a younger and similarily athletic guy makes sense. I just see TT doing what he usually does and draft a position a year ahead of time.


Then in that case, why draft Koyack when you can get a multi-functional player later in the draft? I could easily see us bringing Quarless back. Quarless has been solid, not spectacular. I could see him come back for another short, cheap contract.


I do think that Quarless has been solid for us. I agree that 2 might be an overkill, but I see Koyack as someone that can be a more traditional type TE and offer us something in both the passing and running game. I just see us sticking with more of those type of TE moving forward, as long as we have Lacy as our RB. Saxton is someone that I see filling that Bostick role, the athletic TE that can lineup more than one spot. Also I see the Saxton pick similar to what we did with WR this year, 3 was probably viewed as an overkill, but it gives us some guys to develop in the system.


NCPackFan wrote:
rbens06 wrote:

I agree with you on Thompson that he is best for a 4-3, but the reason we draft him that part isn't as much of a concern. Much like Shazier in this past draft I see Thompson as that athletic coverage linebacker. I think he is someone that can cover and fly all over the field for us, but I agree he is better for the 4-3. Also I agree about Kendricks. I actually had Kendricks slated here, and would actually prefer him, but I think Thompson is the more likely guy to fall of the two. Thompson too is still fairly raw for the LB position. He played nickel as a freshman and spelled at RB too, I think focusing on one position could really allow him to fully develop.


I too think Kendricks might go before Thompson. Question is where and when. Also, why draft a player THAT raw in the 2nd? Not sure the perceived gamble would be worth it at that point.


I think Kendricks will rise some, especially during the workouts. I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see him sneak into the end of the first.

I don't think Thompson is that raw, but still raw. Coverage wise he should be ok. I think he is just still getting used to the comfort of the position and seeing/reading the play from that spot.

NCPackFan wrote:
Also, I gotta give you major DAP for giving me a detailed answer.


Thanks! I appreciate the feedback, it's always nice to get some legit feedback and discussion!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group