Do the Packers Want To Move David Bahktiari To Guard?

A few different NFL media members have reported that the Packers are looking to move the veteran tackle inside. 

So the draft has come and gone and we, as fans, are left to wonder which of the newest Green Bay Packers will contribute to the team this year and beyond.

Of course, it wouldn’t be the NFL draft unless fans engaged in instant speculation that has no chance of being answered any time soon. But damn it, it’s answers we want and so answers we shall seek, no matter how unknowable those answers might be.

There is one question generated by the NFL Twittersphere during the last few days that I did find interesting, albeit somewhat far-fetched on the face of it.

Do the Packers want to move David Bahktiari to guard?

I know. Your reaction is the same as mine.

I think the idea is absolute lunacy, but there sure seems to be somebody in 1265 Lombardi who is trying to float a trial balloon about the idea.

On Friday night, as soon as the Packers traded up for Jason Spriggs in the second round, my Twitter mentions were flooded with people wondering what the selection meant for the future of not only Bahktiari, but all of the guys with contracts coming up after the 2016 season - Bahktiari, TJ Lang, Josh Sitton and J.C. Tretter.

I get that this is what fans do. They instantly project how the young guys fit into the current roster and who they are there to replace. The overwhelming majority of respondents seemed to think that this was simply about the Packers protecting themselves after the disastrous events that transpired at left tackle when Bahktiari went down for an extended time late in the 2015 season, an assessment I happen to agree with.

Of course, this move was also about the Packers protecting themselves if Bahktiari has a stellar 2015 and decides he wants to hit the open market. After paying Bryan Bulaga last summer,, it’s hard to imagine the Packers turning around and paying Bahktiari premiere left tackle money.

All of this makes sense.

What doesn’t make sense is what I’ve read in a few other places in the NFL Twittersphere.

First there was Luke Rodgers Tweeting out the below

I read this and, at first, assumed Luke was joking. I mean, it’s an absolutely absurd idea.

But then, I read this.

Of course, seeing as how this is a quote attributed to Pauline, rather than the actual report, I went to search for the source. It seems to originate from this blurb over at WalterFootball

Packers starting left tackle David Bakhtiari is in the final year of his contract, and the belief is the team would like to move him inside to guard and upgrade the left tackle spot.

Could the Packers be looking to "upgrade" at left tackle? Sure. Could Spriggs be the heir apparent at the position? No doubt.

There’s a growing amount of smoke here - but is there any fire?

I reached out to Bahktiari to see if the Packers had indeed approached him about moving to guard. His response?

“No. I’m a left tackle. Period.”

If the Packers are thinking about moving their starting left tackle to guard, they haven't approached said left tackle. 

0 points

Comments (39)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
gr7070's picture

May 02, 2016 at 11:50 pm

What really makes no sense is we have two studs at guard. They're not going to be replaced without injury or leaving via free agency.

I can understand wanting to upgrade Bakhtiari - he's probably our worst starter on the OL.

I do like Spriggs a lot.

FWIW I've read the 6th round pick has a very high floor, too, which is nice from a 6th rounder.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

May 03, 2016 at 03:26 am

I esspecially like his stout move when opponent OLB or DE make inside move... It is killing move from young LT. It will kill his QB!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
SCFPackFan's picture

May 03, 2016 at 09:09 am

That's totally coachable. Spriggs has amazing footwork for a 300 lb. man and will be our LT for a long time.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Mojo's picture

May 03, 2016 at 11:59 am

It was the first thing I thought of when I read this article. Don't we already have two guards we like?

The only thing I can think of is after this upcoming season is over and either Sitton or Lang or both move on. But this assumes they've resigned Bakh. Would Bakh even resign if he knows he's going inside? Something doesn't add-up here.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

May 03, 2016 at 01:43 pm

I'm thinking that both Sitton and Lang are gone after this year. Perhaps Taylor and Rotheram/Tretter/draft pick at the other spot.

If Bakh is great, they may pay him and trade Bulaga. Move Spriggs to RT. That would make more sense IMO.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
gr7070's picture

May 03, 2016 at 04:48 pm

Only way Bakh signs with any teams after 2016 season is as a tackle, unless the Packers move him to guard in 2016 which only happens if there's an injury to either guard.

Assuming that doesn't happen, someone is going to pay him LT money. Whoever does that will *not* be moving him to guard with that kind of salary.

The whole idea of moving Bakh to guard makes no sense unless it's in 2016 and only then if our stud guards are gone for some reason.

Only other way he's not at LT is if he or Bulaga are benched for someone else. Which that wouldn't exactly shock me - neither one has been a world beater of late, and that also only happens if a new guy is a world beater to replace either tackle.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
The TKstinator's picture

May 03, 2016 at 01:56 am

Maybe this is old fashioned thinking, but isn't a guard supposed to be more of a power player? And isn't that the weakest part of DB's game?
And,
Why would he take OG money when all it would take is one team to offer him LT money in FA?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 03, 2016 at 07:22 am

EXACTLY. First thing I thought of was he's about to get PAID, if not by the Packers then someone. I think the Packers sign TJ Lang and if Sitton would take a discount of some king he might stay too. I'd make sure I signed Trettor and Lang and a possible on Sitton. David B is gone after this season IMO.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

May 03, 2016 at 01:45 pm

What would be the dead money on Bulaga if they cut him? To tell you the truth, I'd rather have Bakh and his durability than Bulaga.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 04, 2016 at 05:42 am

$4,800,000 in dead money ..... His Cap Hit in 2017 would be $7,800,000.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay-packers/cap/2017/

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
tm_inter's picture

May 03, 2016 at 02:38 am

It's all imagination and speculation. Bakhtiari would never want to move to guard. He'll leave if the Packers want to move him to guard. LTs command much more money than guards.

Due to nfl salary cap, the Packers can't afford to pay the entire offensive line much more than what they are paying. So if by the end of the 2016 season if Bakhtiari demands around $10M per year the Packers will most likely refuse and promote Spriggs to be the new LT.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
AgrippaLII's picture

May 03, 2016 at 03:59 am

I couldn't believe the Packers would want to move Bahktiari to guard either. He took over the left tackle spot, proved himself more than capable, and is still getting better at it. Spriggs and Murphy were brought in to be backups for this season and as possible replacements for next season. Ted isn't going to be able to resign all of the Offensive linemen who will be free agents after this season. Though in the meantime I think he will try to get one or two signed to long term contracts before the season ends. I hope Bahk. is one of them!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

May 03, 2016 at 04:22 am

I was kind of surprised that they didn't take a guard. But since they didn't, they must have some future guards on radar already. Sitton has ongoing back issues. Lang's getting beat up too.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 03, 2016 at 08:01 am

Tretter (assuming he's resigned), Taylor and Rotherham are all OGs on the roster that the Packers have invested in, or have made efforts to retain on the PS. At this stage, I think they're in the "mulling it over" phase of how to approach the OL after the FA issues next spring. My bet is that TT doesn't really even know for sure what he wants to do, but that they'll have some general course of action plotted once they get through the first couple PS games and see these guys (including the draft picks) against live competition.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

May 03, 2016 at 06:37 am

He's too weak to be a guard. This is nonesense.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
EddieLee's picture

May 03, 2016 at 07:05 am

How about this. The five starters play at their best spot. Stay healthy and win a championship. The coaching staff has a year to get some good young players ready to play if TT can't keep the line intact after SuperBowl win #5.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 03, 2016 at 07:08 am

I really don't get this thinking at all. I saw it on Twitter when it came out and what I said then I feel no different now.

This move makes no sense to me for a few reasons. First why would Bakhtiari want to play Guard or take Guard money when he can get Tackle money? Second, Bakhtiari is not a good candidate to play guard. Guard's need to be more physical. Bakhtiari is more of a finesse. Bakhtiari's best attribute is his pass blocking. He isn't a great run blocker. Guards have to be stout in both passing and running.

I personally like Evan's thinking more. Move Linsley to Guard and have Tretter as your starting Center. Linsley is a lot more physical and could make the switch to Guard.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't think Bakhtiari would be a great candidate to move to Guard.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 03, 2016 at 08:09 am

I agree on Bakhtiari, but tend to disagree on Linsley. I think he's really pretty much just a center and that he lacks the physical attributes to be a better OG than OC. If Tretter is really the better OC (and I think he probably is, long-term, but I'm no expert), then 1. he'd be the starter and Linsley would sit, and 2. Linsley will probably be dealt or allowed to walk when his contract comes up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

May 03, 2016 at 08:17 am

What physical attributes do you think Linsley is lacking?

I think he's an absolute bull - no one can deny that. But then I see him pull and am blown away by his athleticism.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 03, 2016 at 09:24 am

I would argue that he's a little undersized and has short arms for an OG. He's strong as an ox and has good quickness, but last fall it seemed like he was getting beat up the gut more often than I expected. Poor communcation with Sitton and Lang? Maybe, but I'd err on the sides of the All-Pro and near All-Pro OGs. I think that he's at least a decent if not good OC, but would be an OG that makes you always feel like you could do better. The only way to tell would be to try him there, but when do you experiment on that?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 03, 2016 at 10:58 am

I don't know if he can play Guard. He hasn't ever done it to my knowledge. But I think he would make a better guard prospect then Tretter or Bakhtiari. I don't think Tretter is big enough to play guard, and I don't think Bakhtiari is physical enough.

Linsley's athleticism is very underrated. Nagler has posted vines on twitter that showed how quick he is at pulling. That's why I do think he would make for a good Guard. Also he is a mauler.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 05, 2016 at 07:23 pm

RC. That makes more sense than anything else I have read.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

May 03, 2016 at 07:22 am

If they toy with the idea of moving one of the starting OT to G it would have to be Bulaga. Since when is DB a good run blocker? He simply wouldn't be a fit inside, since he is not a mauler as is needed at that position. He is a decent OT, even though the Packers could use an upgrade, but last season there were no real alternatives (even though Tretter played remarkably well). Now there hopefully is at least one, and if Spriggs can show well in camp, he may be an upgrade over DBakh. So if the OL stays healthy and remains with the 5 starters, then there are now Spriggs and Tretter as quality backups, and hopefully one other one can emerge - maybe Walker, maybe Rotheram, maybe Taylor. That would probably give the Packers the best OL overall since McCarthy became coach.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

May 03, 2016 at 07:40 am

That seems very likely to me. Bulaga may be losing the mobility to hold the edge, but he is filling out as he matures and could be a quality guard going forward.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 03, 2016 at 08:02 am

Are they paying Bulaga too much for an OG? Would his pay rate mess with the pay structure along the line?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

May 03, 2016 at 08:14 am

For 2016 the cap hits are: Sitton - $6.8M/Lang - $6.1M/Bulaga $5.4M. Granted, Bulaga's cap number goes up in the next two years while Sitton and Lang's terminate, but the top guard in the NFL this year is pulling $13.1M, so I don't think that Bulaga's future salaries of $7.8/8.3/8.3 are out of line for a guard, especially when you consider that cap space seems to go up every year. Oh yeah, and having Spriggs at RT on a rookie contract won't hurt either. If you can plug in another guy on a rookie contract at G between DBakh and Lang/Tretter, then you've got a pretty economical line, even if you are paying DBakh at market rate.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

May 03, 2016 at 07:43 am

There is one other possibility: Bulaga's spot is in question. Everybody looks past it because he was just signed last year, but in the last four years he has missed 3, 7, 1 and 4 regular season games. PFF ranked him 48th out of 77 tackles last year (yeah I know, but it's all we got). His salary cap rises to $7.8 M in 2017 and $8.3M for the final two years of the deal. The potential gap between Bulaga's contract v. his ability to stay on the field/play when he is on the field could make him expendable if Spriggs pans out. Heading into the 2017 draft you trade a relatively young Bulaga (currently 26) to a team hungry for a competent T and you move on. I know it sounds a little crazy, but it doesn't sound half as crazy as letting DBakh go if he continues to improve, and nowhere near as crazy as trying to get a guy with four years of experience starting at LT to accept a move to guard when he is about to hit FA.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

May 03, 2016 at 01:49 pm

That's what I'm thinking. Send Bulaga to the AFC and get a few draft picks for him. Maybe even a 2nd rounder...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

May 03, 2016 at 08:17 am

I think there are probably people inside 1265 Lombardi that see Bakhtiari as the weak link on the o-line and Spriggs as a better option. But Spriggs will need to prove it on the field before any alternate plans for Bakh are put in motion.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 04, 2016 at 10:38 am

Perfectly put.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Big_Mel_75's picture

May 03, 2016 at 10:11 am

Bakh would tell them to pound sand.. Why throw away millions of dollars in your contract year. Plus Bakh is not a mauler like you want your interior guys to be. People need to shut their pie hole on things they are clueless about. Spriggs needs to rid the pine this year unless injury occurs. Let him season a year at the pro level. Never hurt any player.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Big_Mel_75's picture

May 03, 2016 at 10:13 am

Oh yeah point to NFL game tape that proves Spriggs out plays any current starter. Oh wait never played an NFL down. Slow down the hype train. I'm sure he will be the next Joe Thomas cough cough. But let the man get some time in NFL.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Point-Packer's picture

May 03, 2016 at 10:35 am

I think the Spriggs draft is mostly about TT's belief that LT's are overvalued and that he'll be faced to either overpay or let Bahk go. Even Russel Okung negotiating his own contract will get 5-8million this year.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

May 04, 2016 at 09:30 am

And Okung, while most likely a nice person, is one of the worst OTs in the league (including being constantly injured). At least the "genius" Elway signed him without any guaranteed money.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
L's picture

May 03, 2016 at 12:31 pm

I'm just glad the Packer have given themselves options to deal with the O-line next year.

The rookies draft picks (Spriggs and Murphy) simply give them options for dealing with the situation that will unfold next year; it helps having them in the picture when figuring out how to approach and address their "to-be" Free Agents.

The questions they'll face:

Keep Bakh at LT or transition him to RT or let him walk?

Move Bulaga to Guard or LT or keep him at RT?

Resign Lang or let him walk?

Resign Sitton or let him walk?

Resign Tretter or let him walk?

Resign Barclay (if he makes this year's team) or let him walk?

Keep Linsley at Center or try him out at Guard?

Much of these decisions; especially, the Free Agent resigning ones, will likely be dictated by the 2016-17 season as injuries and general play will factor into what the Pack decide big time. Again, I'm just glad we have two new players who should help lessen the burden of any potential O-line losses and perhaps allow us to possibly even improve too -- who knows at this point?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Clay Zombo's picture

May 03, 2016 at 09:25 pm

Moving Bakh to guard is just a bad idea. Let him play LT, if he has a great year either re-sign him or let him walk to the highest bidder and collect a nice 3rd round comp pick for him. If he sucks then replace him with Spriggs hopefully and let him walk for a decent comp pick.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Michael Holmstadt's picture

May 03, 2016 at 10:15 pm

Why would Bhak re-sign with the Packerst to play guard? Makes no sense. Doesn't matter if that's what the Packers want. They have no leverage to make it happen. Left tackle is a premier position and he has done a solid job there. Will probably end up with the Vikings.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 04, 2016 at 12:18 am

Dead Money on Bulaga: $8.65M this yr (includes $2.8M paid this week as a roster bonus + $250K workout bonus for a total of $3.05M); $4.8M in 2017; and $3.2M in 2018. Bulaga isn't going anywhere.

I don't think Bakh can play OG. Not sure Tretter, or Linsley can play OG. I'd guess Bakh won't want to play OG and will want LT money even if moved.

Tretter is in a contract year. What makes anyway think he is going to stay cheap? He's proven he can start at OC at least.

We have Walker, Rotherham, and Taylor backing up OG, possibly Murphy down the line, and possibly one of Linsley and Tretter playing OC and the other moving to OG. OL looks to be in good shape for now.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

May 04, 2016 at 09:37 am

Walter Football is an excellent source, and Tony Pauline has been published on CHTV. However, national writers don't always know the details of each team. From the outside, moving Bahk to guard probably appears to be a good move.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.