The Future of Aaron Kampman
by Brandon on Feb 16, 2010 7:00 AM CST
in Green Bay Packers Analysis
43 comments
Last week we went through the list of free agents for the Green Bay Packers, and the comments seemed decidedly mixed on LB Aaron Kampman. It was about half in favor, and half opposed to resigning him. However his ability as a pass rusher can't be replaced in free agency, and they can't expect to find another LB Clay Matthews waiting for them at the end of the 1st round.
The Packers can guarantee his return by placing the franchise tag on him before February 25th. Unfortunately the franchise tag for a linebacker costs just under $10 million. Even if he returns to the field from his torn ACL, he might not return to his 2006-2008 form until 2011 (just in time for the lockout...). Also, bad knees and defensive lineman don't always mix. DE Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila never returned to form after his 2008 knee surgery.
But does Kampman have any interest in resigning with the Packers? Mike Lucas said on a radio show that Kampman was "furious" over how he was used last season. Both Aaron Nagler and Greg Bedard agreed that it's unlikely Kampman is furious at the Packers. But Greg Bedard reminded me of how uneasy Kampman was about the switch to a 3-4 defense.
Mocking Dan over at Mocking The Draft agrees that Kampman wants out and he'll be on a "hot target":
Playing in the 3-4 clearly didn't work for Kampman. He struggled in 2009 and wants out of Green Bay. As an unrestricted free agent, Kampman will be a hot target. Make no mistake, when he can put his hand down and get after the quarterback, he's very good. From 2006-2008, Kampman had 37 sacks. He could be another option for Philadelphia, as well as Oakland and Chicago.
So it's probably come down to the franchise tag. This is probably the toughest call for GM Ted Thompson this offseason. Can he resign his top pass rusher for a reasonable price? Or does he have to go get the tag? Or will he let him walk away and receive nothing in return?
0 recs |
43 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Franchise and Trade
I’m hopeful we can pull off something similar to the Corey Williams deal of a few years ago.
That's the best option
Clearly Thompson won’t pay him $10 million next year, so there is NO chance of franchising him without a deal cut. That, of course, will require Kampman to agree on a new deal with his new team, which means that he is in the driver’s seat.
The article in some ways devalues Kampman. He is a great pass rusher, but you have to remember that he plays on the strong side of the line, where he has responsibility for stopping the run. He is not a speed rusher, he is a genuine strong-side defensive end who can rush the passer (when he’s healthy). These are rare sorts of players who command a premium.
kampman
with the uncertainty of the cba going into the 2010 and 2011 seasons you will not see teams spending crazy money on unrestricted free agents……teams will be filling holes through the draft this year,so by tagging kampman would be a mistake on top of an earlier mistake. nobodys going to give a #1 or #2 for a player just coming off an acl surgery, if you tag him and you get no good offers then your stuck with that 10 million $$$$ contract.
the time to get value for kampy was last year. let him walk and wish him well. we can’t have 30 million wrapped up in a bunch of average lb’s. matthews is the only legit 3-4 lb we have right now.
my vote would be for drafting sergio kindle olb out of texas with our first pick, play opposite of matthews. a good pass rush will hide poor secondary play. just ask the 2007 giants.
Bad better than nothing?
Wouldn’t tagging him and getting a bad offer be better than letting him walk for nothing? I have to believe we’d at the very least be able to get a 3rd for him. Wouldn’t say, a 3rd and a 7th, be better than letting him walk for nothing?
If our options are get a good trade with a tag, get a bad trade with a tag or let him walk, I’d shoot for the first two. There’s the risk you get no one willing to trade anything, but I’d have to think that’s pretty minimal.
by junyer_mint on Feb 16, 2010 10:01 AM CST up reply actions
franchise+trade could be difficult
I’d consider it a huge win if we could get a 3rd or 4th rounder for him, but you might find it hard to find a taker on that deal. Any potential trade partner knows it’d be foolish for us to commit to a franchise-level salary for a guy ill-suited to our D coming off a torn ACL. Knowing that, why wouldn’t they just wait until the Packers rescind the franchise tag and then sign him directly? It’s not like Kampman wants to come back to this D after last year.
Plus, I’d hate for us to franchise the guy and then be unable to find a team to play ball on a trade. We could always rescind the tag should that arise, but that’s not exactly the best PR move after shafting him with the scheme change in 2009.
If there’s a team out there hot to trot right now that’s willing to offer anything better than a 5th, then go for it. Otherwise, the Packers should thank him for his extraordinary service over the past few years and wish him well.
I won't work that way
If you tag him, you have to pay him $10 million. If some other team values him as a 3rd rounder, will they do better than $10 million guarantied? The deal has to be cut before the tag is in place, and I just don’t see Kampman being worth $10 million in guarantied money given his injury. Hermitcrab is right — the window for dealing Kampman was last year.
That’s a good point. I highly doubt any team would be willing to pay him $10 million coming off surgery and being 30.
by packallday555 on Feb 16, 2010 10:29 AM CST up reply actions
it's not what other teams value him as
It’s what they’re willing to give up, knowing the kind of pickle the Packers are in, in order to secure him in a trade rather than acquire him on the open market. That’s entirely independent from what they view his salary should be (except, of course, if he’d be extraordinarily over- or underpaid according to their valuation of him). It’s a remarkably complex equation, especially if more than one potential suitor steps in.
Philly, for example, might think he’d still be worth a 1st rounder were all things equal. But since it’s clear that he’s probably not a good fit for our D, and that Thompson is a somewhat frugal chap, they should know that it’d take far less than a 1st to pull off a trade. If, however, they think that Carolina might be willing to step in and offer a 3rd as well, then suddenly Philly would need to step up to ensure they’re the lucky winners. And so on.
I generally agree that the true window for trading him was last year. But I’d be surprised if there aren’t at least a few conversations aren’t happening. Just don’t be shocked if they amount to nothing.
You can tag someone and then renegotiate a contract that takes over for the franchise amount though. I’ve seen this many times…they’ll tag them so they have time to work out a fair deal.
Not really
If you tag somebody, you take away his right to look for a job elsewhere. The price for that, in Kampman’s case, is about $10 million,. If he is tagged and thus gets a guarantied $10 million for one year, why in the heck would he then agree to a multi-year deal for less? The Packers could always rescind the franchise tag later, but that’s a real horse-crap move, and besides Kampman as a free agent in July would still find a job, especially if teams knew in advance that he and the Packers were not likely to work things out.
Why would he? Security of a long term deal. Players HATE the tag because they know they are one play or one bad season from losing it all. In a LT deal he’d probably get more than $10 mill in guaranteed money anyway so he’d get that money anyway, just in a more friendly way for the team.
At Kampman’s age, he needs a LT deal NOW…every year that goes by he risks his play starting to decline more. Sure its one nice season, but there is a reason why almost all NFL players hate it. They all want a LT contract with guaranteed money and security so they can “put food on the table” as Latrell Spreewell and now Ray Edwards so eloquently put it.
That's where we disagree
For $10 million guaranteed for one year, he’d have to get something like $20 million guaranteed over four years. Hard to imagine anybody sticking their necks out that far for a defensive lineman coming off an ACL injury. Were I Kampman and the Packers franchised me for $10 million, I’d sign in a heartbeat and then take it very slow coming back. Heck, I probably wouldn’t kick it into high gear until the last four games of the season or so.
well all of this really is meaningless I guess cause honestly I really just don’t see this offer being made. The point is that the tag is often used to lock the player down with the end goal of getting a new contract in place. I don’t see why the team would franchise him unless they really wanted him around The price is too high and the value just isn’t there in trade.
I personally want to keep Kampman like many of you already know. He is a proven pass rusher, and it’s not like we’re guaranteed to find a good pass rusher if we try and address it in the draft. And even if we do go into the draft with the mindset that we’re going to address the OLB position as our top priority, what happens if one of the top OT falls to us? Our need for LT is way too strong to pass up if the opportunity to fill it is there. If that were to happen then what do we do about OLB? Just a situation to consider, and I realize there are a bunch of other ones out there as well.
The main reason our pass defense was so poor last year was because of our pass rush, or therefore lack of. Even when we still had Harris, our secondary got lit up by a good passing team (Vikings). You can only cover a WR so long, and when your guys aren’t getting to the Qb in at least 3-4 seconds, your going to be in trouble.
Having Kampman opposite of Matthews would be huge for Matthews. It would likely lessen the chip blocks he faces, and would allow for him to face more 1-on-1 situations. Another element people don’t talk about is Kampman’s ability against the wrong. I know for the most part the run defense was fine after he went down, but when we did struggle it was when teams ran right over Jolly and Jones.
I think if the numbers are right, and if Kampman really does want to come back like he has said, then we should sign him. Having him in there will at least make defenses have to respect him, and probably will result in a much better pass rush, which would instantly improve our pass defense.
kampman played opposite clay last year
and did virtually nothing. he’s not a fit for DE or LB in a 3-4. should have traded him last year and now we will probably have to let him go for nothing.
Sure, but Clay didn’t start until week 4 and really didn’t come on until a couple weeks after Kampman got injured. They also didn’t use Kampman right for much of the first half of the season, and they had started letting him rush the passer much more then they originally did.
I don’t know, maybe we go with Hughes at 23 and then just hope we can find a LT later in the draft or in FA. I just know as long as we don’t improve our pass rush from the left, teams will be able to help out on Clay and we’ll get lit up just like we did last year.
by packallday555 on Feb 16, 2010 9:10 PM CST up reply actions
yes, but
Keeping Kampman and playing him in this D, it’d still be giving opponents a clear hole to exploit. He’s ill-suited to play the true OLB role in the 3-4, and if we instead use him as a situational rusher, then that removes the unpredictability that this D requires.
Plus, if he’s a situational pass-rusher, then do we really want to be paying him top dollar as would be required from applying a franchise tag? I think not.
If he wants to sign with us over a team that plays the 4-3 at a salary commensurate with his role, then more power to him. I’d be happy to have him back. But there’s better out there for him, even with the ACL injury.
kampman
the bigger issue is if kampy even wants to play in the 3-4. i know he’s saying the right things right now just to avoid the media hype, but i remember last year he wasn’t exactly doing cartwheels over the switch.
yea If we lose AK I think that’ll be the only bad thing about the switch to 3-4. He’s a great player and Ill miss him. But if he’s gotta go then we gotta get something in return, dont let him walk for nothing.
Favre 4 Ever
I Believe In Chris Drury
RIP Buddy <3 Love you
by Plusch on Feb 16, 2010 11:16 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I think
he is worth way,way more than a 3rd. The guy gets 10 sacks a yr and he is not like some of the other high paid DE/OLB that get 4.5 of their 13 sacks against one team and then disapear for a few games. I think the question is does he add to your team or make it worse?? IMO he adds to our team. Prior to his injury, his QB hits/pressures were up, his sack total was on the same pace as last year. I think Brandon put it best :
" However his ability as a pass rusher can’t be replaced in free agency, and they can’t expect to find another LB Clay Matthews waiting for them at the end of the 1st round."
The games he was not at his best, NOBODY was getting pressure, not just Kampman. On a side note, I am glad we made the switch to a 3-4 in regards to stopping the run. BUT expecting to cover Vernon Davis, Finley, Witten and Gates type players 30 yrds down the field is a stretch for even a pro bowl LB. At some point a defensive coordinator has to ask himself —Are we using our safties the right way??
" However his ability as a pass rusher can’t be replaced in free agency, and they can’t expect to find another LB Clay Matthews waiting for them at the end of the 1st round."
This is the main reason I want Kampman. He was much better dropping into coverage them most would have you think. He wasn’t great at it, and probably not even good at it, but at worst he was average. I think his pass rushing abilities overshadow that and who’s not too say he won’t improve in coverage after playing some more games? Because after all, he looked average through the first 9 games in coverage. Don’t most of you think he would have looked much better in coverage by our last game? Especially when you take into account that it was the first time he had played LB since college?
I don’t know, I think people just expected so much of him because of what he has been as a DE but what they expected just wasn’t realistic. He likely would have finished the year with 8-10 sacks, and I’m sure he would been much better in his last game as opposed to his first 9 games because after all he was already starting to improve.
by packallday555 on Feb 16, 2010 9:16 PM CST up reply actions
He wasn't even average
The guy is a strongside 4-3 defensive end. He’s not a 3-4 outside linebacker. He doesn’t fit that position and we all need to accept it. If the team wants to go primarily with a 3-4, then Kampman just isn’t a fit.
Chocolate is good. Pizza is good. Chocolate and pizza just don’t go together.
Sigh
Okay, to put it as Mitchell would::
Paneer masala and saag korma are good. Chocolate mousse is good. Paneer masala and saag korma, and chocolate mousse, don’t go together.
By the way . . .
I have no idea what paneer masala and saag korma are, Mitchell represents that they are something people eat in India.
And I’m not necessarily trying to argue that he is but having his pass rushing abilities could instantly help shore up our secondary.
by packallday555 on Feb 17, 2010 10:20 AM CST up reply actions
he’s on the wrong side of 30 now.
he’s coming off a poor season (granted at a non-core position)
he’s coming off a major season ending injury
While I’d like to think we’d get more, I just don’t think it would happen. He’s probably worth more in what he brings to a 4-3 team but that doesn’t mean we’ll get it!
use him creatively
They found the Big Okie to get Chillar on the field, they can’t figure out some creative way to use Kampy? Maybe as a DE in passing situations where he might rush the passer or drop back and the OLB does the same? I don’t see why that doesn’t work. And if he can’t hold his gap on the run and the back gets 7 yds on the rare occasion when a team rushes on 2nd & 9… big deal. I don’t know… he’s a football player. If the coaching staff can’t find a spot for him, then who’s fault is that?
That said, if he does walk, we won’t get nothing for him however you toss the dice. A guy with his experience and value, we’d get a fairly decent compensatory pick out of him, at least. Somebody earlier did make a good point, though, on how he’ll be getting the steam back in his stride just in time for the lock-out.
It’s a tough one. If I were TT, my decision would be keyed to Aaron’s wishes. If he wants to make another go in the 3-4, we’ll find a way to use him and we’ll figure out a way to get the contract done. If he wants to go, then no hard feelings and we figure out a way to hopefully trade him. The Packers will be fine either way. Kampman will be fine either way. It’s just a matter of are our ships sailing in the same direction and does he have a stone in his shoe and how much does he want to wet his beak, and all those other Sicilian messages.
…oh, and Brett Favre sleeps with the fishes. Can’t forget that.
Capers did that in mid October, just before he tore his ACL. It was a very effective move too. Kampman played as a DE in obvious passing downs and Clay blitzed from the right side.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
Exactly. He did it just prior to his injury and it was looking like the change was helping him. Like Curly pointed out, I just think there has to be some way we can use him effectively as an every down guy.
by packallday555 on Feb 16, 2010 9:18 PM CST up reply actions
id love to have Kampman back....but
he’s not a 3-4 OLB, as previously stated. i dont think he can be effective in our current scheme; as evidence last year. but, again, also previously stated, he was starting to play better before he got hurt. so, i dont think theres anyway of doing this to make it low-risk, high-reward but id like to give him another chance next year
Franchise
Theres a side to this that you guys are all missing!!! If we put the Franchise tag on Kampman for the 10M, Kampman is likely to sign it IMMEDIATELY… If he does he is getting paid the 10M, no matter what… THe ONLY way the franchise and trade situation works is if he doesn’t sign the contract immediately. But is Kampman going to just sit and watch as the Packers then try to trade him? Not likely… He’ll take his 10M right away and the Packers would have to pay him and would not get any offers for him at 10M!
Best case scenario is the Packers sign him at a reasonable salary, give him a chance to improve as a 34 OLB. Plus after a year, if he shows he can play the 34 we have a decent player at a reasonable pay OR after the first year, if Kampman shows he is healthy and can still get after the QB then he has some value to other teams again!
Don’t know how this is going to play out, but is an incredibly unique and complicated situation to say the least! The Packers will likely not franchise him, but hopefully will be able to sign him, let him get healthy and show he can still rush the QB, then next year trade him.
Either way he won’t be getting any offers until May or June, when he can set up a workout for GM’s to see to guage his progress and abiltiy again…
He's coming to the Eagles...
And we’re not going to have to give up any picks for him, hopefully.
Viva free agency!
Gosh
I wish I could remember where I read something……. But thought his contract is up—— meaning there is no franchise or trade because he is no longer under any kind of contract. They make him an offer, then he decides to take it or not. There is no franchising. Am I wrong on this??
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Acme Packing Company
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
