Bakhtiari's Deal And What It Means

The details on David Bakhtiari's extension have become available.  As I expected, elite players are still getting paid like elite players despite the Covid-Cap issue.  Before we dive into the contract, I would note that there are significant differences in the details between Overthecap and Sportrac.  In such cases, I always use OTC.  Here is his deal per OTC:

Yr Base SB Roster /Game W-O Cap Dead Savings
20 $6.05 $9.2M   $500K $500K $16.25M $33.2M ($16.9M)
21 $1.075M $6M $11.07M $600K $700K $19.447M $24M ($4.55M)
22 $3.2M $6M $9.5M $600K $700K $20.0M $18.0M $2.0M
22 $6.7M $6M $9.5M $600K $700K $23.5M $12M $11.5M
23 $20.2M $6M   $600K $700K $27.5M $6M $21.5M

OTC indicates that the only guaranteed money is the $30M signing bonus.  Sportrac indicates that in addition to the signing bonus, Bakhtiari's base salaries and roster bonuses in 2021 and 2022 are guaranteed.  I doubt that any money in 2021 or 2022 is guaranteed: 32.6% ($30M of the $92M in new money) is in line with the percentage of money the Packers usually guarantee.  Sportrac indicated that the deal includes $13.5M in incentives, apparently which are not known or are unlikely to be earned.  Bakhtiari played 100% of snaps, and was a pro bowler, so the incentives must be team incentives or All-Pro incentives and the like.  OTC is silent on incentives.  

The odd numbers in the 2020 base and in the 2021 roster bonus are due to the reduction in base salary for 2020 from $10.5M to $6.05M, a reduction of $4.447M.  The Packers had already paid him $5.558M in weekly checks when the contract was signed but the team still has to send him game checks for the rest of the year.  Going forward, those game checks will be calculated at his prorated veteran minimum salary of $1.05M, or $61.75K per week.  Over the next 8 weeks, that totals about $494K instead of almost $5M.  I am sure Bakhtiari's agent did not forget the $4.447M reduction in guaranteed money, so it almost certainly is included in the signing bonus and the 2021 roster bonus.  

The deal reduces Green Bay's cap space by $1.56M in 2020 ($16.25M minus the $14.7M he was scheduled to have).  I suggest that the roster bonuses are made to be converted into signing bonuses (at least 2021's).  I would assert with some confidence that it is unlikely Bakhtiari's cap number in 2021 will be a whopping $19.447M.  Converting $11.07M to a signing bonus would reduce his cap number by $8.3M to about $11.14M in 2021.  On the other hand, it would increase his cap number by $2.767M in each of the remaining years, with 2024 just topping $30M.

I do not think there is that much to say about the structure.  The Packers paid market price for an elite left tackle.  The guaranteed money is reasonable.  The cash flow is reasonable for both sides.  The team could not or did not try to persuade Bakhtiari that Larry Tunsil's deal at $22M is an outlier made possible only by the incompetence of then General Manager O'Brien of the Texans.  It is a two-year extension worth $53M ($26.5M/year) or a three year extension worth $70.55M ($23.5M/year with $12M dead and $11.5M in cap savings). If one adds up all the numbers in base, roster and GA roster, signing bonus, plus workout money, it adds up to $96.445M, but one should reduce that by the $4.447M that the agent did not forget to reach $92M in new money ($23.0M AAV).  

WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

Let's start with the obvious: it means that the Packers prioritized Bakhtiari over some of their other soon-to-be free agents and over their other options.  Those other options include keeping money in the "cap chest" to spend on free agents from other teams next March, and their own FAs, for that matter.  Bakhtiari has a chance to be a hall of fame left tackle if he can play four to six more years at an elite level.  I suppose it might take some guts to let such a player walk over money.  It probably means that the Packers believe a $23M AAV "dancing bear" at left tackle is worth it, either for Aaron Rodgers or when (and if) Jordan Love becomes the starting quarterback.  I would assume that the Packers did not think they could get by with Elgton Jenkins, Billy Turner, or Ricky Wagner at left tackle, or did not want to have to move any of them there.

Extending Bakhtiari presumably should be considered a "win-now" move.  There is still plenty of room to argue about that. Saving his $1.56M cap increase in 2020 and not spending $11M to $19.4M of cap space in 2021 is money that could have been used to sign Aaron Jones, Corey Linsley, Kevin King, or some combination thereof.  The next clue to the Packers' philosophy will not arrive until after the super bowl, when the team can re-structure Aaron Rodgers again.  Rodgers has $21.5M in base and roster bonuses due in 2021.  A little over $20M can be converted to a signing bonus to free up a ton of cap space.  Rodgers has three years left on his deal after this season, so that the team could save over $13M if they so desired, or they could take a page from the Saints (a fairly positive example in terms of success) and the Eagles (not such a positive example) and add a void year to free up more space.  The Packers could extend Davante Adams which should allow for savings of $7M or more in 2021.

The shorter answer is that I do not know what it means other than the Packers do not plan to forsake all chances of winning in 2021.

THE NUTS AND BOLTS:

Per OTC, the Packers have $200M in contractual liabilities.  OTC believes the cap limit will be $176M.  The Packers currently have $5.03M in cap space which could be rolled into 2021.  The Packers only have 40 players signed for 2021 at present.  PS contracts all automatically expire after each season, so the Packers presumably will sign at least 11 of them.  Using the Rule of 51, that would mean 11 more players at the minimum of $660K for a cap cost of $13.86M.  That looks like this:

Liabilities -$200.08M  
Cap Limit + $176.0M  
Subtotal - $24.08M  
Cap Rollover Max + $5.03M  
Subtotal* $-19.05M  -$17.281M
11 more Players -$13.86M - $13.860M
Total -$32.91M -$31.141M

*Totals do not include the cost to sign draft picks in May and June, the cost to sign PS players in September or to keep any cushion for operations during the 2021 season.  Those items call for at least $5M or so at a dire minimum.  "Total" means the amount that has to be cut by March when the new league year starts.  OTC and I are about $1.77M apart on cap space so I started a second column at the subtotal with the asterisk: I will chase down the discrepancy later.   

The only real way to reduce liabilities is to look at the team's twelve highest paid players and their contracts.  That's where the money is.  Here are most of those players (Saving+ = using a June Designation and the Dead*22 indicates the resulting additional dead money charge in 2022 while an asterisk after the player's name means the player is scheduled to receive a roster bonus in March so any decision needs to be made prior to paying the bonus):

Name Cap # Savings Saving+ Dead Dead *22
Rodgers* $36.35M $4.79 N/A $31.55M N/A
Z. Smith* $20.75M $10.75M $15.75M $10M $5M
D. Adams $16.6M $13.0M N/A $3.6M N/A
P. Smith* $16.0M $8.0M $12.0M $8.0M $4.0M
A. Amos* $10.3M $4.3M $7.3M $6.0M $3.0M
B. Turner* $8.05M $3.55M $5.8M $4.5M $2.25M
D. Lowry $6.3M $3.30M $4.8M $3.0M $1.5M
B. Wagner* $6.0M $4.25M N/A $1.75M N/A
C Kirksey* $8.0M $6.0M N/A $2.0M N/A
M. Crosby $4.5M $2.5M $3.5M $2.0M $1.0M
J. Jackson $1.99M $1.33M N/A $657K N/A

I intend to enjoy watching the Packers play this year and probably win a lot of games.  That said, I am watching some of these players (and their backups) closely to see which players might be candidates for restructuring or extending so the team keeps them around, and which players might be cap casualties.  The Packers could ask a couple of players for simple salary cuts.  In my own opinion, I do not think trades will be available except for elite players like Rodgers and Adams, not that I want to trade either of them.  I suspect that a lot of average but more or less solid starting players will have a tough time on the open market next March, but perhaps teams will just assign a low cap number for 2021 and otherwise pay them as usual.

Of the players above, only Preston Smith ($12M), Lowry ($4.8M) and Kirksey ($6.0M) are firmly on my radar as possible cap casualties.  That totals $22.8M, about $8M to $10M short of the immediate goal, and perhaps $13M to $15M short of the total needed.  I think Amos, Turner, Crosby, Z. Smith and Wagner are playing too well or are too valuable to jettison. 

As noted above, the Packers could get $5M to $13M from Rodgers, $7M plus by extending Davante Adams and $8.3M from Bakhtiari.  Regarding my proposed Bakhtiari restructure, remember Kenny Clark is playing 2021 for $1M in base salary, $600K in a workout bonus, and $500K in a game active bonus for a maximum possible cash payout of $2.1M: I do not think Bakhtiari is going to take home $12M in cash in 2021 after the huge signing bonus and having already cashed in on a second deal.       

After getting $22.8M from cap casualties, another $20M and probably more from restructuring/extending Adams, Rodgers and Bakhtiari would give the Packers $43M plus in cap savings, which would be enough though not by a comfortable amount.  It would pay for tenders on RFAs Tonyan and Sullivan, and but tenders to RFAs Lancaster and Redmond (I would not tender Boyle - just re-sign him cheap) might be difficult, much less signing Jones, Linsley, King or Williams.  Asking Zadarius Smith to move some money around would help some more.

General Manager Gutekunst was quoted after Bakhtiari's signing as follows: "The players that might become available to us during the March period may be a little different than it has in the past, and we want to have the flexibility to do those things if we can."  I do not see quite that much flexibility, but there are reasons I do not have Russ Ball's job.  Or perhaps GM Gutekunst envisions cuts to players not on my radar, particularly if there are a bevy of veterans in free agency who have a tough time getting decent offers, or any offers.

The Grim Reaper might be busy next March.  

 

NFL Categories: 
6 points

Comments (37)

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

November 20, 2020 at 09:43 pm

I used a photo of Bakh of course. I like the idea of keeping elite players, but I have to admit that $23M AAV is a lot of money.

I don't remember if I mentioned this on CHTV. It is my understanding that the national deal for the Thursday Night Football games (currently worth $660 million on average per year expires after the 2021 league year. That suggests that any increase in the money from any new deal would flow into the NFL during the 2022 season. After that season the NFL will calculate its entire national income and then set the salary cap limit for 2023. In other words, the new deal won't affect the salary cap until the 2023 league year. Thurs. Night is worth the least because there are 16 games and 32 teams so every team has to play one such game. There is no ability to flex or adjust the games: if two terrible teams are scheduled to play week 15, that's the only game that is possible to televise.

The other national deals, Monday Night Football ($1.9B/year currently from ESPN), AFC Sunday Package ($1.09B ave. from CBS), NFC Sunday Package ($1.08B/year ave. from Fox), and Sunday Night Football ($990M/yr ave from NBC) all expire after the 2022 season. The money flows into the NFL in 2023 and affects the cap in 2024. There are other national deals, streaming and digital deals about which I read nothing.

I heard on the radio that if fans are not allowed in stadiums for the rest of the year the Packers expect a revenue loss of $112M, about $53.7M of which would be normally allocated to the players via a reduced salary cap (unless offset by increased national money). Since the NFL and NFLPA agreed to a cap of no less than $175M, that suggests each team is already "borrowing" $30M from future cap increases. Maybe Goodell will earn his money and substantially increase national money or the NFL and NFLPA will decide to increase the floor to something more than $175M. IDK. Teams should have a better idea what is likely or possible.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Gee's picture

November 21, 2020 at 04:26 pm

Thank you as always TGR both on this site and Acme. You help to fill in the blanks, like few I have read. So maybe if the whole lawyer thing isn't working, I see I full time role in all things G.B related.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

November 21, 2020 at 07:40 am

It's a Massive contract and "IT"s Just To MUCH!" This contract is going to hurt the "Team Roster" in the long run. It signals " BUSINESS Type" decisions coming. There just isn't enough to go around anymore. And with that comes NO JOB appreciation. King, Linsley, Jones, and Williams, only will have one thing on their mind. "Show me the money"! The Packers just gave away the Home discount.

+ REPLY
-4 points
3
7
PackerBacker77's picture

November 21, 2020 at 11:58 pm

They gave away nothing. Show me the last home town discount contract the packers did sign

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Bearmeat's picture

November 21, 2020 at 07:43 am

Thanks TGR. I always learn when I read your posts, although as a music dork, instead of a math dork, they make my head spin a bit. ;)

My personal bet for 2021:

1. Jones, King, Williams, Linsley are goners, with Jones being the last possible re-sign. (Though I'd be surprised)
2. P Smith, Wagner, Kirksey, Lowry are cut.
3. Extend Adams to lower his cap figure.
4. Possibly move Z's contract around a bit.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

November 21, 2020 at 11:13 am

According to the Bearmeat plan, we will be replacing EIGHT of our 22 starters, and one rotational DL(Adams) this offseason. Without any money to acquire comparable replacements in free agency. So are we starting Day 3 rookies and UDFAs next year?

According to the Leatherhead plan, we let the free agents leave. We stick to the plan that has us at 20-5, meaning we don’t blow more holes in the team by cutting guys that you don’t think are “good enough”, even though our personnel department thinks they are.

We don’t give more money to Adams, we don’t move Zs contract around. We stick with the plan.

+ REPLY
-2 points
1
3
dobber's picture

November 21, 2020 at 01:35 pm

But the Leatherhead plan doesn't get the Packers under the cap for 2021 (assuming a contraction to $176M). There are hard decisions that are going to have to happen to push the Packers onto the right side of the ledger. That's the whole point of the "Nuts and Bolts" part of the article. Letting their FAs walk and standing pat won't do it on its own.

+ REPLY
7 points
7
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 21, 2020 at 01:28 pm

The Bearmeat plan is pretty much the TGR plan. Gute isn't going to allow 8 of the 22 starters to leave because he wants to, but because he has very limited options.

The OS plan allows Bakh, Jones, Linsley, Jamaal, and King to leave, so that's 5 starters or main contributors. Those are guys who helped make that 20-5 record happen. Perhaps we have the depth on the OL to lose the two best players in that room, but the replacements would be downgrades and probably big downgrades. Both are 30ish, so that's a factor and Linsley's back issues scare me.

Realistically, GB even if it didn't need cap space the team probably should cut Preston, Kirksey and Lowry unless they greatly improve their performances over the last half of the season. I view them as deadwood rather than as starters who will be missed. We've gone 7-2 despite playing Preston Smith, Lowry and Kirksey, not because of their play. Is Preston just having a bad year or can he rebound over the rest of the season and in 2021? It is a $16M dollar decision (well, $8M anyway).

Montravius Adams is doubtful for the Colts game. He has looked better, but he can be re-signed cheap. If the FA market is really depressed, then Gute's allusion to wanting flexibility makes a little sense: replace M. Adams with someone better.

Who knows? Perhaps the salary cap in 2021 turns out to be significantly more than 2021, either by agreement of the NFL and the NFLPA (since that makes considerable sense) or because the income loss is less than anticipated. Gute at least has time to see how things look in Feb. and March.

Always fun to butt heads with you, LH!

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
flackcatcher's picture

November 21, 2020 at 01:51 pm

I suspect that the Gute plan was the Letterhead plan, till Cap Man struck. At some point, both the union and owners need to figure out how to inflate their Cap numbers. Otherwise, there will be chaos in both rosters and the free agent market. Cap man wins. Cap man always wins. (Well, except for teams like New England and Green Bay who will be looking for quality free agents cheap. Cap Man becomes Green Bay's pulling guard. GO CAP MAN GO!)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 21, 2020 at 03:46 pm

Yup. Pre-Covid, I am sure Gute expected to have about $36M more in cap space (say $212M - $176M). That situation makes all kinds of things I suggested unnecessary. But I think Gute would have signed Bakh, Jones, and maybe King depending on his market. He'd have the money to do it.

Gute probably also assumed that some of those 4 big FAs he signed might not pan out and would need to be cut after two seasons. Instead, all 4 played well year one and 3 of the 4 are playing well in year 2. Yes, the dead money is regrettable, but take the cap savings and call the dead money a cost of doing business.

I'm sure Kirksey was a 2 year deal with a one year prove-it limitation. We shall see about him. Kirksey's contract looks back-loaded but it really isn't: GB paid him $6M for 2020 (with another $1M in GA bonus) and scheduled just $4.75M (with another $1.25M in game active bonuses) in cash for 2021 AND they made sure he was an easy cut: $6M savings, $2M dead. 3 to 1 ratio means the player better play well to stick. Wagner as well. Paid $6M plus $750K in GA in 2020 and scheduled for $3.5M in cash with another $750K in game active bonuses. Cap savings to dead in 2021 is 2.5 to 1. Very much a hedged bet and both front loaded, something rare in Packerland. The cap numbers increased a lot for both players in 2021, which is common, but with small dead money charges, that isn't a problem.

Preston was a pay-as-you-go deal with the cap backloaded but the cash even. On a $13M per year deal, Preston will earn $27.5M over 2 years. Preston is scheduled to earn $12M in cash in 2021. Is he worth that money? Right now, the answer is no. So take the $8M and move on unless he plays better or the coaches can explain and fix why he isn't playing well.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Bearmeat's picture

November 21, 2020 at 07:26 pm

That's exactly it. Times are what they are and we're all having to tighten our belts. I don't wish ill on any working man. But I will say that in a hard cap league, what matters most is the production of the player compared to the cap hit of the contract.

This was the exact "problem" with ARod for most of 2015-2018. It's not that he was a "bad" QB. It's that he was not worth a 35m cap hit. Obviously, his play has completely changed this year.

The story is the same right now with Preston. Frankly, while they are playing well this year, (when available), I'd question the wisdom of re-signing King, Linsley and even Jones for this reason. Maybe even Adams with how much he's been hurt.

Preson, Lowry, Wagner and Kirksey right now cost more than they're worth. Hence the cut suggestion in hard times.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Guam's picture

November 21, 2020 at 08:03 am

Thanks for the analysis TGR. Good work as always.

Clearly the Packers prioritized Bahk over younger players like Jones, Williams or King. I find that surprising, but I probably shouldn't have since I didn't see Jordan Love coming either. I just can not get a fix on Gute's philosophy. It certainly is not either a "win now" or "win in the future" philosophy, but some mixture that results in the Packers being competitive, but never all in.

I suspect the agents for P. Smith, Lowery and Kirksey have done the same math you have and have told their clients to either pick up their games for the second half of 2020 or expect to be working elsewhere in 2021. Changes are coming........

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Leatherhead's picture

November 21, 2020 at 11:21 am

Guam......cutting Lowry, Kirksey, and PSmith would create $13 million in dead money, which would be applied AGAINST any available cap space, and it would create 3 more holes in the roster to go along with the free agents who are leaving.

Why do people want to blow up a group that’s 20-5?

+ REPLY
-3 points
0
3
13TimeChamps's picture

November 21, 2020 at 12:07 pm

Maybe because they keep getting punched in the mouth whenever they play a team with an above average running back and average QB play, even knowing what's coming, and not having a clue how to stop it.

Indy and Tenn will be the measuring sticks for the rest of this season....and how to proceed in the offseason.

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
Guam's picture

November 21, 2020 at 06:31 pm

LH: I think you are missing the point. The Packers CAN'T keep everyone from the 20-5 team. They will be $30+ million OVER the Cap if they try. Even though these cuts will leave $13 million in dead money, that is still substantially less than keeping the full amount of their contracts.

The Packers must cut some players and convert other base salaries to pro-rated money to get under the Cap - that is just the reality of the Bahktiari signing. I don't like this and was one of the "soothsayers" (to quote Al) that was in favor of letting Bahk walk. I would have much preferred to let Bahk walk and keep more of the other players, but that is not the reality the Packers have anymore.

Gute chose to "blow up a group that is 20-5" the minute he signed Clark and Bahk to large contracts. Not the scenario I wanted, but it is the one the Packers must now deal with.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
Duneslick's picture

November 21, 2020 at 12:37 pm

Gute some mixture that results in the Packers being competitive, but never all in.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
murf7777's picture

November 21, 2020 at 08:11 am

Thanks TGR for taking the time to spell out packers cap situation and alternatives. It will be interesting to see if the projected 175M cap is increased.....I believe it will be or we will see much lower salary signings for FA in 2021.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 21, 2020 at 09:38 am

Um, Bakh is scheduled to earn $13.45M in cash for 2021 while Clark can earn at most $2.1M in 2021. Bakh is going take home $13.45M whether the Packers convert his roster bonus to a signing bonus or not. The article seems to suggest otherwise. Clearly the author is an idiot or at least was having a temporary (?) brain fart.

Here is a tweet from Ken Ingalls wherein he opines that the Packers have to create at least $40M in cap space for 2021. I agree while noting more than $40M would be better. He also notes that the Packers could generate $13.6M from Rodgers by converting base salary and roster bonuses into a signing bonus. My guess is that the Packers convert some but not the maximum amount possible. Something in the $5M to $8M range but not $13.6M. The Packers seem to want to keep a good team on the field over the next few years and hope for lightening to strike, maybe win a super bowl, without going all in by doing radical things. As noted, by doing a Howie Roseman (Eagle's GM) they could add some void years to generate $16M or just rip up the deal and change a lot of numbers.

https://twitter.com/KenIngalls/status/1329849754537308164

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 21, 2020 at 10:50 am

There is another issue I ignored in the article because it already was long and full of numbers. The Packers have to comply with the cap limit by March 17, day one of the 2021 league year. That means finding roughly $30M in cap saving prior to March 17.

Teams don't get the cap savings on June designations until June. If the Packers release Preston Smith with a June designation, they don't get the $12M cap savings until June, but they need it by March 17.

So I think GB restructures AR, extends Davante, and converts Bakh's roster bonus to generate savings of something in the low to mid twenties. Maybe they move money around in Zadarius Smith's contract. Try to hit the $30Mish they need that way. Then pull out the Grim Reaper.

Not sure if GB really wanted to sign their own or free agents from other teams if they could reach a deal on a handshake and not have the deal become official until June 2. 2021 Free Agency could be really weird, but that seems like a stretch to me.

Edit: Kirksey ($6.0M) and Wagner ($4.25M) would be on the last year of their deals and don't have any benefit to waiting for June to release them. I like Wagner and wouldn't cut him, but now I am dealing with numbers more than would or should. So to reach the $30M to $32M needed by March 17, Kirksey is a no-brainer for a straight release. [Kirksey played much better against the Jaguars after being awful in game one and two, so watch him and Martin, Barnes, dare I say Burks, and anyone else who can play ILB.] So, Adams, Bakh, Kirksey = $23.3M, need 7 to 9 million more. Something from AR and maybe a straight release if Wagner. Then the Grim Reaper comes out for Preston and perhaps others.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Doug_In_Sandpoint's picture

November 21, 2020 at 10:28 am

Thanks TGR. I’ve said before I think the plan was already in place to replace AR for 2022. QB1 may be causing a rethink with his improved play, but has anyone heard any comments from anyone on Love? Has his play in practice surprised in either direction? If we had the second coming of Mahomes on the bench, I think we’d hear someone mention it. There would be talk of how he’s breaking receivers’ hands, or how he juked Preston Smith out of his jock or something. Anyone?

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
BAMABADGER's picture

November 21, 2020 at 10:31 am

Bakhtiari contract is a gross overpay.... period. Obvious 2021 cuts to consider (if cap allows): P. Smith, D. Lowry, B. Wagner, C. Kirksey, J. Jackson.

+ REPLY
-2 points
1
3
dobber's picture

November 21, 2020 at 02:11 pm

I don't think they made the decision to sign Bakhtiari in a vacuum. They're fully aware of the implications of this deal, and I'm sure they have some plan of action...whether it's one we like or not remains to be seen.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Leatherhead's picture

November 21, 2020 at 11:01 am

I think it’s great. And as soon as he’s injured, or has an off game or two, the nitwits at the end of the bar can start talking about cutting him to create cap space for a speedy wide receiver (never mind the millions in dead money.)

Looking forward to it.

+ REPLY
1 points
5
4
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 21, 2020 at 11:24 am

LOL.

I never endorsed this signing. If I am one of the nitwits in the bar, at least the numbers will be pretty close to accurate. I don't suppose the other guys in the bar will include Gute and/or Ball?

Your description of Bakh as an expensive "dancing bear" was too good for me not to use. I probably should have given attribution to you. $19.477M cap number plus the $1.56M in 2020 would have been enough for Jones, Linsley and King. If it gets reduced to $11.3M, about enough for two of those three.

GB made its choice. IDK.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

November 22, 2020 at 02:08 pm

Lindsley seemed to get the picture when they extended Patrick in 2019. Not much for LTs in 2021 draft unless you climb into the top 12 picks. King was/is a 50/50 proposition for a roster based deal, but he seems to be breaking down. Jones has to produce for them this year to get anything. That ship has sailed. Quite a few good RBs in this draft.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 21, 2020 at 11:04 am

Gute seems to be envisioning a scenario in which teams are bleeding healthy, proven, solid starters that they can't afford to pay, or at least have to cut by March 17 to comply with the cap. And perhaps those not elite guys (since elite players are still getting paid normal money) can't find a team that will make a decent offer, or any at all. So GB dumps players who aren't bad because they can sign veterans from other teams who are just as good or better than GB's guy but will play for the same or less than the player GB cuts. That is, the FA market is extremely depressed. IDK. Maybe it will happen. Seems like a stupid way for the NFL and NFLPA to run a business.

Example: Amos is playing pretty well but has a $4.8M/$7.3M cap savings. Is there a veteran safety who will play for less than $4.8M? For less than $7.3M if that player is really good? I only see Keunu Neal and but at FS I see Anthony Harris and Justin Simmons are UFAs. Too bad they are not a fit since GB is committed to Savage, and probably rightfully so.

Example: Even if Preston were playing better, the UFA market for OLBs is loaded: Judon, Von Miller (team option I guess), Ingram, Dupree, Barrett, Lavonte David, Markus Golden, Reddick, Leonard Floyd, and if you just want a cover guy, there's Fackrell and others who might be dirt cheap.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
flackcatcher's picture

November 21, 2020 at 01:02 pm

Thanks for the breakdown. Solid as ever TGR. Two points: Gute as a GM tells this fan base what's coming. In his last year's end of the season presser, he said he was signing Clarke, Bakh and King if healthy. So the Bakh signing is not unexpected. This is the third time Gute has mentioned that next year's free agent market might be depressed, and he would be exploring it. Giving his track record, I take Gute very seriously on this. With the current structure of the NFL, this could be a once and lifetime opportunity for the team, to do major upgrades at little to no cost over the short term. Hard to see the man who grew up under Ron Wolf turning this down.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
flackcatcher's picture

November 21, 2020 at 01:30 pm

As an aside, I suspect the NFL is going to have a very rough ride over their TV contract renewal. Overall, ratings have taking a nose dive. The big three have taking a beating this year, and ESPN might be visited by the Grim Reaper over this. All and the others (radio, internet etc. etc.) will expect some form of relief over this disaster of revenue in their contract talks. Even with vaccines coming sooner than expected, the hit to all parts of the economy is deep, and may be longer lasting to all. So even if Goodell wants to ask for an increase, he has little leverage to use, at least in the short term.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 21, 2020 at 04:08 pm

Well, then he should load up his cap chest. That might mean some unexpected cuts. Maybe Gute cuts Zadarius to pick up $10.75M to $15.75M and replaces him with Von Miller or Judon, etc. What Gute didn't do was put the screws to Bakh's 2021 cap number like he did with Clark.

The Jets should have $100M+ in cap space. They might buy a whole team of starting caliber free agents. Probably could fit 10 to 13 ten million/year players in with $100M. And if those 10M/year players would normally get $15M/year, so much the better.

I wonder about the ratings. Lots of articles in September, mostly blaming woke, and a Breitbart article in October noting ratings were down 10% over the first four weeks. But I looked through four pages for a recent article on rating, like one at the half way point of the season, which I would expect to exist. Can't find anything. I am not exactly into woke, and didn't think I'd watch much NFL television outside the Packers. But the NFL has toned it down enough not to bother me, at any rate. I'd like recent numbers.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
flackcatcher's picture

November 22, 2020 at 06:46 am

LOL The Jets. Ownership will find a way to spend and LOSE at the same time. It's a tradition with them. A lot of GMs across the league are preparing for the worst. Gute having a Cap chest should not surprise anyone here at CHTV. He has already proven himself to be one of the real good GMs in this league who with his team plans years ahead. This will be a challenge for him. In an organization where the players are the product. The NFL has a good chance of roster carnage if they and the union don't get their act together. And not to oversell, that could do real damage that the league might not be able to overcome for years. Don't expect to see anything ratings wise till the end of the year. While there has been a few tweets and social media type posts hinting about an uptick, the nets' ecosystem was wreaked when production was shut down due to Covid-19. Nets are hiding the numbers this year, can not blame them on this. Still, it's hard to judge sports programming in a vacuum. (What happened to the NBA in the bubble was a warning to all) But the NFL has been down game to game compared to last year. And last year show some downward movement for league compare to past years. Long term trend? That remains to be seen, but it is not good for the NFL in their contract renewal talks.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jurp's picture

November 22, 2020 at 09:32 am

Here are the recent numbers you asked for: https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-nfl-tampa-bay-buccaneers-televi....

(yes the link actually goes to the correct article; odd address, IMO).

Anyway, in case the link changes, I'll summarize:

- At midseason, ratings are down 6% over last year.
- Four of the top 30 shows since the season began are NFL games.
- Ratings did not suffer the precipitous declines that happened during the last presidential election cycle in 2016, when they were down 14% compared to 2015.
- Thursday and Sunday night packages have suffered the biggest declines with each package down 16%.
- TV Execs are optimistic that ratings will now increase with the end of the election.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
flackcatcher's picture

November 22, 2020 at 04:44 pm

Thanks Jurp. I remembered the AP story, but couldn't find it. Pretty sure that was what TGR was talking about.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ferrari-Driver's picture

November 21, 2020 at 12:30 pm

Perhaps we could cut the three obvious candidates and go much deeper in the roster for money and it appears likely the free agent market is going to be a place to sign some of the same players and others for significantly less money based upon the 2021 team cap.
Edit: I forgot to add that I really enjoyed your article. Thanks for the effort.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
CoachDino's picture

November 21, 2020 at 08:38 pm

WOW!! What a fantastic article. Thank-you for the skill and taking the time to do so....Not to mention your structure and ability to clearly articulate. As one who sooo lacks in those skills I really can appreciate it. (never should of Dropped Comp for College for a Cooking Class in HS so I could get out of school by 11:30am - had a blast though)

Your hypothesis on future moves / potential moves seems highly probably as well.

The Packers spend the money on the positions that contain, on analysis available, the greatest ROI QB/LT/CB/Edge.
Very sound. IMO it's where fans and analysts miss out out on the Job Gute and in his day TT do with the draft and mid level FA signings.
IMHO a huge point your analysis points to is a simple decision - spend draft capital and cap space on a franchise LT that's arguably the best in the game that plays 100% of the snaps OR pay/draft or trade for a:
8 week only player (rental)
IDL that plays 20% of the snaps
#2 or #3 WR that will play maybe 70% of the snaps and be critical on 10% of the plays.
Cut Rodgers (not so much this year - all the rage last year)
the list could go on with lesser scenarios of decisions leading to terrible roi that directly correlates to performance.
Saving the money and signing a RB,CTR and often injured mid level #2 CB.

To be honest I was torn and thought the Packers or any GM would have a hard time paying the price they did for Bak. Plus being a fan of AJones and CL.
Thank-you for me now being able to stand behind that move even with the consequences (cost/benefit).
Hate to lose CL more than anyone but I don't watch enough film to really know how much of an impact he makes and the gap between him and more reasonably priced Ctrs. I'm not that high on Hansen from what little I hear.

I'm going to print and keep this article for go to research for determining where I stand on this great past time. Armchair gm fan that we all play and enjoy...even better if you can make a few Bucks of it.. PLEASE keep up the great work...TALK is cheap.... Detailed analysis take time, money and skill

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

November 22, 2020 at 04:14 am

Thank you for the kind words. This particular article took me about nine hours to write and edit. I think one of my comments above should have been part of the article itself - the one that notes that the Packers have to comply with the cap by March 17, the first day of the new league year, so restructure AR and Bakh, maybe Z Smith, extend Davante and cut Kirksey to meet the Rule of 51 on 3-17-21. Then make the June designation and other cuts.

Your comment on ROI and positional value is something I think about at draft time but didn't consider for this article. Gute adhering to fundamentals is interesting. A great comment section is one wherein readers challenge or support the author's opinions using better stats, analysis and advanced metrics than the author used or espouses a whole new rationale about something.

Preston Smith has a $12M cap savings if designated as a cut in June. Now, it would be nice to have that in March during free agency. However, that amount is useful: it could pay for signing the draft picks (rounds 4-7 are cap neutral actually so they can be signed in time for OTAs and rd 3 is a few hundred grand). It can be used to sign the PS in September, and perhaps form some of the cushion for operations during the 2021 season. But most importantly, it could be the space used to sign Jaire Alexander to an extension. White got $17.25M, Marlon Humphrey got $19.5M and Jalen Ramsey got $20M AAV. Jaire could win a Pro Bowl nod this year and next which would make his 5th year option payable at the franchise amount.

Not one person on CHTV will have the slightest problem paying Alexander.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
TXCHEESE's picture

November 22, 2020 at 07:23 am

I always kinda thought Gute’s plan was to jettison one of the Smiths after this season, with the idea that Rashan would be ready to assume a starting role. Great work again TGR. As a banker, I’m a numbers guy and fully appreciate the work put in on these articles

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1

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.