November 14, 2019, 09:09:33 AM

Author Topic: Lacy  (Read 34919 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline wonderfulwilly

  • Second String
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Lacy
« Reply #165 on: March 14, 2017, 10:19:53 AM »
He'll fit in great in Seattle.  He's a lot like Lynch in the sense that he's a tackle breaking machine that is among the very best in the NFL in getting yards after contact. 


Yet another blow to our team in what has been an absolutely disastrous off season.

Lol. Disastrous? Really? Who have we lost that can't be capably replaced? TT is sitting on some money right now, we aren't done shopping either.

Offline Lodestar

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2446
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: Lacy
« Reply #166 on: March 14, 2017, 10:21:10 AM »
Maybe a dumb question, but on a one-year contract how meaningful is the guaranteed portion? Specifically for a guy like Lacy who is unlikely to be cut in TC.

Offline Leader

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13020
  • Karma: +2/-0
Re: Lacy
« Reply #167 on: March 14, 2017, 10:21:48 AM »
He'll fit in great in Seattle.  He's a lot like Lynch in the sense that he's a tackle breaking machine that is among the very best in the NFL in getting yards after contact. Yet another blow to our team in what has been an absolutely disastrous off season. 

I think we're witnessing a retooling.
JC - decent player and good fill in across the OL - but he's not shown he can play half a season w/o getting hurt.
TJ - a player (no challenge there) - but he's got some serious injury issues.
Eddy - a player - but can you be comfortable going forward he'd be there to carry the load? 

I think we're cutting bait with the "question marks" - which, if solid talent evaluations are made will be better for the club going forward.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2017, 10:23:04 AM by Leader »

Offline iarwain

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1413
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Lacy
« Reply #168 on: March 14, 2017, 10:31:40 AM »
I think we're cutting bait with the "question marks" - which, if solid talent evaluations are made will be better for the club going forward.
Makes sense, and if so it demonstrates a fresh approach to addressing the somewhat baffling injury problem that the team faces so often.

Offline Waynorth

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Lacy
« Reply #169 on: March 14, 2017, 10:40:38 AM »
Packers News‏Verified account @PGPackersNews  9m9 minutes ago More
 Eddie Lacy weighed in at 267 for one team this week, according to @BobMcGinn. That's just above Nick Perry's listed weight.

Welp.


     If true, I'm glad he got away. Even with an injury a little motivation could have prevented this. Is football a priority for him?He leaves plenty of room for doubt. He's not  that great when he's over 240.  If the Seahawks didn't include weight incentives in his contract they are delusional.

With that said, he sure was fun to watch when he was at his best, and I wish him well in his career.
"Knowledge does not enter your brain through an open mouth."

Online craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3968
  • Karma: +22/-4
Re: Lacy
« Reply #170 on: March 14, 2017, 10:42:13 AM »
If so, that might also correlate with an even further-reduced interest in resigning Datone. 

Offline MTPackerFan

  • Second String
  • **
  • Posts: 62
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Lacy
« Reply #171 on: March 14, 2017, 10:47:28 AM »
If so, that might also correlate with an even further-reduced interest in resigning Datone.

I really hope we re-sign Jones. He's actually pretty good.

Offline JQ

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1429
  • Karma: +7/-2
Re: Lacy
« Reply #172 on: March 14, 2017, 10:48:25 AM »
On the plus side, we are going to have so many draft picks next year.

You’re assuming the Packers will receive a comp pick for him. That’s not necessarily a given.

I too am bummed about this, ESPECIALLY since he goes to the seagulls.   

Offline cpk1994

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6299
  • Karma: +1/-10
Re: Lacy
« Reply #173 on: March 14, 2017, 10:55:05 AM »
Yet another blow to our team in what has been an absolutely disastrous off season.
Beyond ludicrous. Lacy is overweight and has injury issues. Lang is a guard and guard is the easiest position to replace. Perry was resigned retaining a chunbk of the their pass rush and they signed 2 good TE's.  Nowhere close to disastrous.
"Aaron Rodgers is a baaaaaaad man" - Stephen A. Smith

Offline Toddfather

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1694
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Lacy
« Reply #174 on: March 14, 2017, 10:56:34 AM »
Really wanted him back. I hope we add someone else before the draft.

Offline Lodestar

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2446
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: Lacy
« Reply #175 on: March 14, 2017, 10:58:59 AM »
On the plus side, we are going to have so many draft picks next year.

You’re assuming the Packers will receive a comp pick for him. That’s not necessarily a given.

I too am bummed about this, ESPECIALLY since he goes to the seagulls.

At $5.5M I think it's almost a given.

Right now, if Peppers qualifies, we're sitting at 4 picks. Peppers may get washed out, but there's still Cook left to gol

Offline SSGCujo

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 743
  • Karma: +11/-1
  • Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way! G.Patton
Re: Lacy
« Reply #176 on: March 14, 2017, 10:59:20 AM »
 RBs don't last long in the NFL, especially ones that are overweight and run hard. Lacy is a good back, not great. He's been hurt the last two years. Him getting a one year deal explains his worth, SHOW me you can play at weight and not get hurt. TT will draft two RBs now.

Online The GM

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2924
  • Karma: +75/-4
Re: Lacy
« Reply #177 on: March 14, 2017, 11:17:16 AM »
Packers News‏Verified account @PGPackersNews  9m9 minutes ago More
 Eddie Lacy weighed in at 267 for one team this week, according to @BobMcGinn. That's just above Nick Perry's listed weight.

Welp.

As Ive said before, too fat and too slow. Clearly he wasnt committed to football and ate his way out of GB.  Good for Thompson for moving on.  Perhaps a change of scenery will do Lacy good.  Seattle has great nutritionalist and chef that does well with their players.  That will help, but its on him to make it happen. 

Offline marklawrence

  • Administrator
  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3079
  • Karma: +52/-13
Re: Lacy
« Reply #178 on: March 14, 2017, 11:23:15 AM »
I was not ever a big fan of bringing Lacy back. It's not just money; I think people here undervalue the 53 available roster spots. I would have been ok with bringing Lacy back for maybe like $2.5m, but even then that's one young RB we can't carry on the roster. If the hags want him for $5.5m, well, happy trails. I predict:

1. He'll start strong, we'll hear a lot of whining here about how we coulda been a contender.

2. He'll get hurt a bit, but play through it at a decreased effectiveness.

3. The combination of weight, running style, history of injury, and build up of new injuries, especially running into the DLs of the NFC west, will mean he's all but completely ineffective by mid November.

4. Assuming the Seahawks make the playoffs, Lacy will be either benched, IRed, or all but completely ineffective.

5. By December Christian Michael will be outplaying Lacy.

That's my predictions and I'm sticking by them.
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” -- John F. Kennedy.

Offline JQ

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1429
  • Karma: +7/-2
Re: Lacy
« Reply #179 on: March 14, 2017, 11:27:29 AM »
On the plus side, we are going to have so many draft picks next year.

You’re assuming the Packers will receive a comp pick for him. That’s not necessarily a given.

I too am bummed about this, ESPECIALLY since he goes to the seagulls.

At $5.5M I think it's almost a given.

Right now, if Peppers qualifies, we're sitting at 4 picks. Peppers may get washed out, but there's still Cook left to gol

You may be right, and I obviously hope you are!