Packers Question of the day - Is it time to pay Nick Perry?

After a stellar start to the 2016 campaign and leading the team in sacks, Nick Perry is proving that the Packers declining his fifth-year option earlier in the offseason may have been the right choice. He was put onto center stage with the opportunity to show why he deserves the extra cash, and so far, he's delivering.

Since 2012, his health has been spotty and his on-field production was as well, but since the 2016 playoffs, Perry has been on a tear. 

Is it time to cash in and keep Perry in Green Bay and not wait until the offseason to do so? Or will the Packers' front office choose to invest in one of their expiring offensive linemen contracts first?

__________________________

Zachary Jacobson is a staff writer/reporter for Cheesehead TV. He's the voice of The Leap on iTunes and can be heard on The Scoop KLGR 1490 AM every Saturday morning. He's also a contributor on the Pack-A-Day Podcast. He can be found on Twitter via @ZachAJacobson or contacted through email at [email protected].

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (31)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
NMPF's picture

November 02, 2016 at 09:23 am

Not sure if they should wait or do it now but TT is going to re-sign him. Between Peppers 10M- Shields-12M- Starks 4M, team will be over 40M under the cap. I'm pretty sure TT's not going out of the organization to spend like a drunken sailor. Draft and Develop,Draft and Develop,Draft and Develop.

0 points
0
0
zoellner25's picture

November 02, 2016 at 09:51 am

I think Peppers and Shields are done in GB after this year, so that clears up alot of space. Wait to resign Perry, but they should do it.

0 points
0
0
Gianich's picture

November 02, 2016 at 09:36 am

Yes, then we will see if his play takes a dip or not after getting paid. Get it over with. Especially with Clay Hamstring on the sideline, Datone being undisciplined, Peppers being old, and Elliot and Fackrell as question marks.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 02, 2016 at 09:43 am

This is a prove it year....let him prove it for the whole year. Especially in big games which are coming and playoffs if we make it. No loss in waiting since I believe he'll jump at the first offer that's higher from a 4-3 team. The loss will be signing him to an over paid, high guarantee deal that we'll regret nearly immediately.

0 points
0
0
NMPF's picture

November 02, 2016 at 10:38 am

No Green Bay Packer (other that #12) in their 2nd contract has more that 33% of their contract guaranteed. Sorry to cloud your caustic hate with facts.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 02, 2016 at 10:55 am

I mentioned no percentage but simply implied his guaranteed money shouldn't be high regardless of the total deal but based on his inability to guarantee consistent play.

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

November 02, 2016 at 11:08 am

if Ted waits for the season to be over then Perry will wait for free agency... I think it would be wise to pay him now, given that later the price tag will be higher. Peppers is done after this season, and I will argue he might be done now already. Elliott is a role-player, we'll have to see about Fackrell. That leaves Clay and Jones. Clay is dealing with injury issues, and his play slipped as well. Jones is simply not that good. So if you want some stability at OLB for the next year, I don't think Perry should be let go, and I do think it would be wise to sign him to an extension sooner rather than later... Just my opinion, of course.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 02, 2016 at 11:25 am

I have no problem with keeping Perry, just the amount of money he gets for what his real play/difference making ability is which many have to high imo.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

November 02, 2016 at 02:43 pm

There i promising player on PS - Reggie Gilbert. He showed some good flashes during preseason...

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

November 02, 2016 at 09:49 am

I would not re-sign Perry at this time. I do not think that we have seen enough to determine what a new contract would be worth. Perry is having his best season but will it continue? Will his level of play remain consistent. He dropped off in the Atlanta game. Which Perry shows up this week? I think that we wait for later in the season when we have a greater body of work to determine what his contract should be worth. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 02, 2016 at 09:54 am

So you agree with me via a softer approach which no doubt will be more accepted. : )

0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

November 02, 2016 at 11:10 am

"He dropped off in the Atlanta game. " - true. That's since the O could focus on blocking him, as nobody else showed up. He is one of the few defenders on this team capable to being a difference maker. Not that many around...

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 02, 2016 at 11:21 am

How many games gave the Packers won because of a difference making play by Perry. How many big games have we loss that can pointed at Perry's lack of play or stupid things done....offsides on a FA attempt vs SF which then allowed them a go ahead winning TD but the loss got put on Hyde for missing the Int.
Again, there is no real risk in waiting to see what he does come more big need win games this season. That's what the money is for. ..visible not invisible.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

November 02, 2016 at 03:37 pm

Once again you are cherry picking instances that fit your narrative. Why do we have to find a specific instance of him winning a game with a play to validate his play?

Your argument about not paying him works against your argument to wait to sign him. Of they sign him now the pack can set the price/anchor point. If they wait and he continues to produce then he'll become more expensive. Besides name one Packer that TT overpaid... I'll bet you'll have to dig to find one

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 02, 2016 at 05:31 pm

He was referred to as a " difference maker " therefore there should be references to substantiate that description.
As to over paid. ....Matthews but some agree and disagree.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 02, 2016 at 08:10 pm

@Spud: find one packer TT overpaid - that is sarcasm right? Hawk, Starks, Pickett the last time, come immediately to mind, and arguably CM3, Shields, and Bakh.

0 points
0
0
carusotrap's picture

November 02, 2016 at 09:55 am

I don't think we have any idea what Ted Thompson is thinking. His personnel management process has lost any real rational focus, other than don't spend anything until you spend everything. Well, that and "there is no player on any other team who I am convinced is better than what we have now."

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

November 02, 2016 at 10:41 am

Keep in mind ted gave two guys 66% of the salary. He has little negotiating room left. If hegives him a big co tact and he falls back to the old take plays off perry, the team is in deep do do. Belly chech never lets this happen.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

November 02, 2016 at 12:19 pm

"Keep in mind ted gave two guys 66% of the salary."

All I can figure is that you post these things, crawl out of your parents' basement, and brag about what kinds of responses you get from us on these boards. I don't understand why you keep posting things that are fundamentally wrong...and dumb.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

November 02, 2016 at 10:26 am

One thing is almost certain, Thompson won't sign someone else to play in Perry's spot, but he could believe he already has the player on the roster in Frackrell though I hope not. Frackrell could really be something next season though after a year in the weight room.

Peppers is coming off the books so if they were to pay Perry they'd really be sliding that money over to him. Letting Sam Shields go would cost them $3.125 million in dead cap money but gain them $9 million cap space. The Packers can absolutely afford to keep Perry, get Tretter signed, and still have plenty of space.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

November 02, 2016 at 10:38 am

" The Packers can absolutely afford to keep Perry,"

It isn't a question of being able to afford Perry, which should be of no worry, it's about his real value. Which via his play is a slide ruler and the decision needs to be based on a total seasons play and not a couple of games of equal good and bad.

0 points
0
0
NMPF's picture

November 02, 2016 at 11:37 am

At this point Perry seems to be ascending. Granted his performance in prior years has not what you would hope for a 1st rd choice. Some of that can be attributed to nagging injuries. He is in the top 10 of LB's in sacks, PD and with 1, Ints. Players mature at their own pace, in this case maybe patience is a virtue.

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

November 02, 2016 at 10:38 am

Trade him now for picks. Oops, to late ted. I wouldnt give him a dime. Ironic how his game improved in year five, contract year. He aint playin for the team he is playing for a payoff or trade. He is not that good. Easily replaced in the draft?

0 points
0
0
guzzi2000's picture

November 02, 2016 at 11:38 am

I'm inclined to wait and see what he does for a full season. However if you can sign now for what would be considered a bargain, then maybe. Overall I think the jury is still out.

0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

November 02, 2016 at 12:41 pm

I know there's a lot of discussion with Packer fans for Perry. I wonder how much is outside the team? If you are a GM and you like what you see in Perry this year, you also have to ask yourself if this guy can stay healthy? That's why I don't think TT will be getting into a lather to sign him before the season ends. I actually think he would gladly pay him a lot if he stays on active and continues to perform.

If a team really wants him and will pay top five salary for a OLB, then TT won't stand in their way and will say to Perry good luck. This info came from Wikileaks that should be shared to everyone soon......I just couldn't help myself!

0 points
0
0
lou's picture

November 02, 2016 at 12:46 pm

This position group could be like the inside linebacker group two seasons ago. Peppers you would assume would only comeback at the veterans minimum if the team finishes well (meaning they believe they have a real shot at the Super Bowl in 2017), Jones who is new to the position continues to be inconsistent, and Clay continues to be a question mark to play a full 16 games because of his all out performance on game days leads to injuries. Add to this, Elliott has show flashes as a pass rusher but does not anchor well to hold the point and Fackrell's ability to take the 2nd year jump is anyones guess. Perry who has had real injury issues is the only one if under contract you could pencil in if healthy that has the experience and is still young to start several more seasons. Again, this group is a question mark for 2017, hopefully not to the extent the middle LB group was 2 seasons ago.

0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

November 02, 2016 at 01:13 pm

I agree with those who say wait until he finishes one whole season. The guy has never played an entire season since he turned pro.

0 points
0
0
fastmoving's picture

November 02, 2016 at 02:48 pm

I dont get that thinking...........
So when he stays healthy the whole season, that means he will stay healthy next year too? Since the future is always up in the air, he only will get more expansive if he plays a full season without injuries at the current level .
we should already know, after 5 season, what we have in him and I would sign him ASAP. maybe even after a couple of weaker showings, so he has not too much leverage. I believe in him.
If everyone can see he is worth something we have to the pay the price. So its not always the smartest thing to buy the stocks at an all time hight.

0 points
0
0
Mike McSchottenheimer's picture

November 03, 2016 at 07:48 am

Perry plays an impactful position as an edge rusher in a 3-4 defense. The question is....has he made impactful plays? Does his play illicit the response "we have to be aware of which side Nick Perry is rushing from and slide our protection that way"? The answer is clearly no. You can't be in a rush to pay him game-changer money when he hasn't made game changing plays while being in your system the last 4 1/2 seasons. Is he worth that much more than a rookie like Fackrell? Can't pay a guy money halfway to Matthews when you're getting Eric Walden type production.

0 points
0
0
fastmoving's picture

November 03, 2016 at 09:23 am

You can also argue that CM3 is getting CM3 money for Fackrell type production.
maybe two years down the road Perry is better than CM3, looks like a real possibility to me

0 points
0
0
Mike McSchottenheimer's picture

November 03, 2016 at 11:57 am

Matthews was making impactful plays in only his second year. Remember the game changing forced fumble in SB45? Yes, he's been hurt but he's also been moved around and still made an impact. To suggest Matthews is less impactful than Perry is absurd. Is he worth his contract? Probably not...but to suggest Perry is deserving of a multi-million dollar, multi-year deal because he might be good is ridiculous. The guy has had almost 5 years in the league and has done nothing of significance to warrant a large contract. Matthews earned his large contract based on stellar past performance. Injuries have hampered him but when he plays he usually makes plays. Perry, on the other hand, becomes invisible when asked to be the man.

0 points
0
0