The Packers Are Still Trying To Generate Enough Cap Space

The Packers used max void year restructures on Douglas and Campbell but still need more cap space. 

The Packers restructured the contracts of Devondre Campbell and Rasul Douglas.  Per Field Yates, the Packers generated $2.628M on a max void year restructure of Campbell's contract.  Field Yates also reported that the Packers generated $3.3M on a max void year deal for Rasul Douglas.  It appears that the actual savings came out to $3.336M for Douglas' deal.

The team so far has not converted workout and game active bonuses for any of the players they have restructured.  All of the salary cap sites also noted that Pat O'Donnell had a $650K signing bonus due on March 17.  There have been no reports on O'Donnell's contract.  It appears that the Packers did not convert his roster bonus to a signing bonus.  The potential for savings in such a case was $548K.  Either the Packers needed O'Donnell permission or the team decided to forego the cap savings for 2023.

I initially listed the cap savings possible from the top 12 candidates if the Packers converted all available cash into the existing years on each player's deal.  I was concerned that some of the players would refuse to add additional void years onto their deals.  Ken Ingalls listed the players while using maximum void years to ensure that any cash converted to a signing bonus would be spread over the 5 year maximum.  That made sense to me, so I put the table in my last two articles.

Player Amt ~ Player Amt ~ Player Amt
Bakh $12.028M   Jaire $9.456M   Campbell $2.628M
Jones $11.216M   Smith $6.668M   O'Donnell $548K
Clark $11.068M   Douglas $3.336M   Gary EXT $3.025M

It appears that only Bakhtiari balked at adding extra void years.  The Packers converted every nickel of the cash due to Bakhtiari into a signing bonus, but either because the team did not ask or Bakhtiari refused to agree to additional void years (for the third time in a row), the Packers only gained $7.5M in cap savings.  That left $4.5M in 2023 cap relief on the table, which would be most useful at this point.  The Packers generated $11.816M in cap relief from Aaron Jones.  That is more than the table shows but the difference is due to the $5M pay cut he accepted.  The Packers have gotten the exact numbers listed as potential cap savings in the table above for Clark, Alexander, Smith, Douglas, and Campbell, so far.

 

WHAT ELSE CAN BE DONE:

It is possible that the date of O'Donnell's roster bonus was reported incorrectly, but if the Packers paid the $650K out to him, that cannot be undone.  As for Gary, I still expect the team to reach terms on an extension that should generate $3M in cap relief for 2023, give or take a little. 

The other main candidates for cap relief are Darnell Savage ($7.9M due in cash), Yosh Nijman ($4.3M due in cash) and Jon Runyan ($2.743M due as base salary).  All three players are in contract years.  No doubt all three would prefer extensions rather than max void year restructures.  All three players can safely assume that they will have a job in the NFL in 2023, as none of them are candidates for cutting, so none of them have any particular reason to agree to void years.  

Savage has the most leverage simply because his cash is fully guaranteed for cap, skill and injury, plus he can offer the most cap relief at $5.457M.  While it would not hurt him to accept a max void year restructure, he gains nothing, either.  Savage cannot expect an extension since 2023 is a prove-it year for him.  Perhaps if the Packers paid part of his $7.9M salary, a trade to Savage's liking could be arranged.  It may be that Savage thinks Joe Barry's scheme does him no favors.  Trading him would create a hole in the secondary since he played 819 snaps last season, though that number figures to be reduced in 2023.  If the Packers paid him a $3M or $4M roster bonus and then traded him (to generate $3.9M to $4.9M in cap savings), would a team cough up a day three pick?  [The NFL does not allow trading a player for cap relief: that is, the Packers would have to get a draft pick back in return for Savage.]

Robert Tonyan accepted a max void year restructure when he was an RFA so it seems possible that Nijman would as well.  That would generate $2.57M in 2023 cap relief.  If Nijman thinks he has plateaued, then he and the Packers could probably agree on his market value and negotiate an extension that could reduce his cap number in 2023, but there might not be a ton of room here to low his 2023 cap number.  On the other hand, if Nijman thinks he still has upside, or might improve if given another year at right tackle, or just thinks he would earn more as a left tackle, things become a little messier.  I confess to not being as high on Nijman as many fans.  I think he is an okay starter that most teams would be trying to find an upgrade for.  Yet, I acknowledge that he might still have upside and having to switch to right tackle might have been impeded him from improving.  That said, I view him as a chess piece: I would accept a second round pick and would consider a high third rounder.  He will be an unrestricted free agent in 2024 and even mediocre starting tackles get paid in the NFL.    

Jon Runyan is more of a "break glass in case of emergency" type.  As a drafted player with 3 accrued seasons, he can be extended or restructured.  There just isn't a lot of room to work with.  His market as an average to average plus starting guard is set.  The Packers could gain $1.39M on a max void year restructure, and probably a million or so on an extension, more if the parties were willing to be creative. 

Jordan Love is due $2.298M in base salary, but his minimum is $1.01M, a difference of $1.288M.  I suppose the Packers could sign him for 2024, possibly for the expected amount of the fifth year option (which he seems likely to get anyway) plus the $1.288M while adding a couple of hundred thousand to make it worth his while to wait for that amount.

Finally, the Packers could go back and fully guarantee the workout bonuses (and/or the game active bonuses as well) of all of the players and convert them to signing bonuses.  By CBA rule, guaranteeing a workout bonus automatically converts them to a signing bonus amortized over the remaining life of the contract.  Green Bay is scheduled to pay out about $4.9M in workout bonus, so converting them all to signing bonuses would generate a little under $4M in cap space.  Converting the $5.25M in game active bonuses the Packers are scheduled to pay out would free up a little less than $4M in cap space.  The team would have to beef up its in-season piggy bank a bit.  If a player with a $700K game active bonus gets injured, promoting a player from the practice squad is largely covered by the money not paid to the veteran who got hurt.  Other than that, the team can decide not to elevate practice squad players this year (about $950K in possible savings) or deciding not to re-sign players like Leavitt, who probably will command $1.3M to $1.5M in cap space in favor of an unknown draft pick or UDFA signed after the draft who is cheaper.  Everything in this paragraph is well into New Orleans Saints' cap-handling territory and beyond, for that matter.

So, everything in my bag of cap tricks is exhausted.  As far as I know, at this point the well is dry, though Russ Ball might know how to prime the well. 

 

CURRENT CAP SPACE:

According to Ken Ingalls, the Packers have $2.0M in cap space, assuming Rodgers gets traded, the team gets $3.025M in cap relief from extending Rashan Gary, and Mr. Ingalls includes signing their current draft picks, paying the 52nd and 53rd contracts plus the practice squad, and maintaining a $5M in-season piggy bank.  That does not include Rudy Ford (who signed for "up to $2.5M"), LS Matt Orzech, S Tarvarious Moore or Corey Ballentine.  At this time, their respective cap numbers are not known.  The net is probably close to zero.  [Edit: Aaron Wilson reports that Ozrech's cap number is $1.18M for 2023, so that reduces cap space by $430K.  Corey Ballentine's minimum is $1.08M, so that reduces cap space by $330K.] 

Overthecap lists Green Bay with $23.732M in cap space.  Subtracting $8.69M for trading Rodgers, $4.3M to sign currently known draft picks, $3.456M minimum for the practice squad, at least $1.5M for the 52nd and 53rd contracts, $500K for practice squad elevations (elevating two players every game would cost $1.008M per Ken Ingalls), $5M for PUP/IR/in-season piggy bank, and $1M for game active bonuses plus incentives that might be earned would put the Packers at negative $714K in cap space, but does not include savings from a Gary extension.  OTC includes Ozrech, but not Rudy Ford or Corey Ballentine.

I do not see sufficient cap space to sign the 13th pick (estimated cost $3.35M cap number) or the 43rd draft pick (estimated cap number of $1.55M) should the Packers get one of those picks in return for Rodgers, though pick 43 would be close.  Since the cap space estimate includes a $5M in-season piggy bank, technically the Packers would have enough cap space to sign such draft picks.  They would just have to hope very few players go on PUP or IR, earn incentives or otherwise require cap space.

 

HOW ABOUT SOME GOOD NEWS!

Given the above, it seems unlikely that the Packers will be signing any free agents of note, which means they should get compensatory picks for the players they have lost.  Lazard should be a solid 5th rounder in 2024 at $11M AAV.  Last year, Randy Gregory had the lowest AAV at $13.9M to earn a 4th round compensatory pick, so Lazard isn't worth a 4th.  Jarran Reed signed for $5.4M, which should be worth a 6th rounder.  Jordan Whitehead has the lowest AAV at $7.25M last year that earned a 5th, so Reed isn't going to bring a 5th.  Melvin Ingram with a one year deal for $4M still was worth a 6th, so Reed seems like a solid 6th.  Lowry signed for $4.25M AAV, so one can hope that he is worth a 6th, but cap inflation probably pushes him down to a 7th.  Lowry got $4.2M guaranteed in 2023, so his deal is pretty solid.  Robert Tonyan signed a one year, $2.65M contract with the Chicago Bears with $1.25M fully guaranteed.  That is a solid 7th rounder.  Adrian Amos has yet to sign.  I currently envision the Packers getting four compensatory picks in the 2024 draft, including one fifth, one sixth, and two sevenths with Amos still out there as a possibility.  

As a note, OTC's description of Rasul Douglas' contract has errors, in my opinion.  The numbers do not add up.  OTC has complained about other sites using their information without credit, so it may be an intentional mistake.  Spotrac and other sites list the correct information for Douglas.

 

Photo courtesy of Tork Mason of USA Today Sports

 

 

 

 

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

NFL Categories: 
6 points
 

Comments (65)

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

March 21, 2023 at 02:16 am

I was looking around and see that Ken Ingalls issued a series of tweets outlining some other break in case of emergency ways to increase cap space. They mostly involve fairly small amounts from other fourth year guys like Deguara. I have linked his twitter below.

Of course, GB could persuade Gary to do them a solid and accept a max void year restructure instead of an enormous extension, at least if his agent is dead at the switch. That would yield $7.8M or so in cap space instead of the $3M I envisioned. No problem getting a guy to take $10.89M in cash when he is expecting in excess of $30M. I suppose the Packers could tack on a 4 year deal for 2024-2027 that's so good as to make it worth his while.

I forgot Marcedes Lewis. If he decides to play, he should get a contract in excess of the $1.75M threshold to qualify for compensatory picks. If the Packers do find enough money to sign an outside UFA that cancels Tonyan's deal, then perhaps Lewis can restore that final, fourth comp pick. It would be sweet if Lowry's deal sneaks into the 6th round category, it is just that cap inflation probably pushes it back.

It is a little disappointing and also interesting that Tonyan left for so little. His cap number could have been in that $1.4M range on a max void year restructure (MVYR for short?) which is a type of deal he has taken before. Perhaps GB has a lower opinion of him than fans. Or maybe they really like the TE class and figure that at some point there will be a TE they like on the board when they have a pick. Might be first round, but more likely 2nd to 5th. There might be two such tight ends.

https://twitter.com/KenIngalls?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7C...

7 points
7
0
TKWorldWide's picture

March 21, 2023 at 08:57 pm

Sincere question here:
What do you say to those who claim “the cap isn’t real”, “there’s always ways to create space”??

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 22, 2023 at 01:04 am

Grit my teeth, mostly.

The cap is real but it is generally true at the same time that there are usually ways to create at least some more space than the team has chosen to do. But there is a limit as to how much a team can generate in any one year.

1 points
1
0
TKWorldWide's picture

March 22, 2023 at 07:38 am

Makes sense to me! Thanks, TGR!

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 02:32 am

GB also needs a safety or two. I noticed that the Eagles have now lost both their starting safeties, and there are other teams in need of a safety in a class that tanked at the combine. The Eagles have pick 10, 30, 62, 94, 219 and 248 at present. 10 might be too high, but GB's 15th pick might be too high for any safety. Pick 30 might not be too high, though. And some safety fans hoped might slide to 78 might get picked at 62 or so.

I suppose fans think Rudy Ford will start. Bleech!

Also, if it is true that the Packers are holding out for pick 13, a pick estimated by OTC to carry a $4.8M first year cap number, the Packers either have some tricks up their sleeve to get more cap space or are thinking outside the box. I mention crazy New Orleans but Howie Roseman of the Eagles pulled some crazy cap shenanigans, which seemed to have worked out well for that team. Maybe GB converts all the workout and/or game active bonuses to signing bonuses. Probably worth $8M in space. To be honest, I think that's legal as these void year restructures were not technically renegotiations, which are limited to one every 12 months per player.

6 points
6
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 05:12 am

Wonderful work, TGR. Again.

How would a suspected David Bakhtiari trade affect this cap? Not that I want him traded, but can see if AR goes, DB likely follows.

Quick note on TE class, after top 5 - all R1 worthy - there’s a fast drop off with next 4 being R4-R5. It’s a class that’s unusual. TE not normally taken en mass R1, but, might want to get while the getting’s good. A team could get great value in R2.

Safety is interesting. Some great talents in Branch & Johnson up top, but there’s a solid handful this year who can help into R2-R4, ones I really like, or might like better.

GB might want to tap both positions early.

All of us can readily point to other positions of need to address, and adding picks via trading down seems really attractive as an option this year for GB.

Thanks for your cap insights. Huge help.

2 points
2
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 05:21 am

Trading Bakh post June yields $2.208M in cap savings. Trading Bakh at the trading deadline (week 8) yields $984K in cap savings. GB can't trade Bakh pre June because the cap damage would be about $16.8M in lost cap space, which GB doesn't have.

I can see a Bakh trade if he is playing well and his knee looks solid at the trading deadline. He should be worth a first. His final 9 games would have under a $1M cap number. $21.5M in 2024, though.

5 points
5
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 05:27 am

Appreciate your helping to clear that up for me.

Hmm. A lot of funk to be worked through in all of this. The maneuvering to maintain cap has been extraordinary.

Are you looking at this to possibly facilitate a draft day AR trade?

Is it possible we’re so tight the post June 1st scenario might be more aligned with Packers wishes? Tough to determine how much more draft capital would add into the AR trade deal, should NYJ be allowed to keep their #13 and #43 this year?

OTOH, GB barely squeezing the #13 & 43 into our cap with the additional conversions you spoke of, might be a necessity for the Jets? Because they’re unable to afford the picks?

Seems like a ton of big maneuvering with purposeful expediency.

Does it look to you as if we’re in a position to take the big AR hit now, rather than waiting post June 1st, stretching it into 2024?

Looks like that $$8M additional maneuvering taking us to our complete limits may get us under the wire with 13 & 43 in hand, and possibly some clear sailing in 2024!

“So, you’re saying there’s a chance…” lolz

This is nuts. Excellent work, and I’m grateful for your sharing.

1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

March 21, 2023 at 08:00 am

"Is it possible we’re so tight the post June 1st scenario might be more aligned with Packers wishes? Tough to determine how much more draft capital would add into the AR trade deal, should NYJ be allowed to keep their #13 and #43 this year?"

Part of why a pre-Jun 1 trade (or a trade that involves added high picks in 2023) seems less and less likely.

3 points
3
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:24 am

It does, but, then again, maybe it’s the Jets who actually would like the additional cap relief that comes with moving that #13.

Packers might want that, and I’m left wondering if we aren’t scrambling to make it a draft day deal, absorbing the hit by the skin of our teeth this year, while also being able to afford that #13.

From the Packers perspective, yeah. Agree. But, maybe the Jets are driving this one, and the only way we get that #13 in trade for AR is if we forego that June 2nd stuff.

That was my point. Couldn’t articulate it… lol

The struggle is real, dobs…

1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

March 21, 2023 at 11:16 am

Makes trading out of the first round this year potentially something to consider?

3 points
3
0
T7Steve's picture

March 21, 2023 at 09:34 am

TGR, if what you're saying plays out at safety, wouldn't it be better to try to make a deal with Amos rather than head into unknow territory? It's great having Ford, but only in packages not as a full timer. What kind of contract do you think he'd garner? With an existing FA isn't it easier to structure the contract favorably for the cap hit?

1 points
2
1
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:04 am

It isn't so much the Eagles specifically, just a note that there are some teams out there that are probably looking to the draft for a starting safety. I pointed out Philly because they lost both of their staring safeties, are $312K over the cap at present according to OTC (but have two players they could restructure in Slay and Lane Johnson who are due $31M in cash for 2023), so they are a team probably looking for a starter in the draft. I don't know Philly well enough to know whether they think they have a replacement on their team that could fill one or both spots - the old internal development thing.

Andy Herman has said that Amos has clearly lost a full step, and at times he has said maybe two steps. IDK, myself. I think Amos wanted to see what his market is now. Too bad, because Ken Ingalls floated the idea of giving him a one year deal for $5M before free agency hit - it could have been done so that almost none of his $7.95M in dead money hit the cap. Now it has, and it can't be undone. We shall see what some team thinks he is worth. He might have to wait until after the draft to attract the attention of teams that missed on a safety in the draft, and for when he is cheaper and/or no longer counts against the comp pick calculations. That team might be GB. OTOH, GB might view him as a backup or rotational player now, albeit one that knows the defensive scheme. Do they even want him? If so, at what price?

2 points
2
0
Coldworld's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:58 am

They have apparently been talking to Amos. It could just be cost, but it could also be that he has similar views as Gray. As to the speed, he’s 29, he will be 30 in April. That is very young to slow so considerably. Was he healthy, was it discomfort with the system in terms of uncertainty or being asked to play outside his fortes?

We have a whole load of roster spots to fill and holes. This leadership has backed us into a corner that may force us to throw more large chunks of cap forward—the last thing we should want to do at this point—and still leave certain positions weak or gambling in as yet unrealized potential. That’s if we actually manage to trade Rodgers too.

3 points
3
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:31 am

Steve, I think Tarvarius Moore’s signing with GB is your guy to take Amos’ reps. OMG, I can’t wait to see him play in this defense.

Elite run stop plus great ball skills. Do not look at his pro stats, because SF fucked up and moved a great Safety to CB, and it wasn’t in his wheelhouse.

The Packers bringing him in to play his natural position should reap immense benefits.

2 points
2
0
T7Steve's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:39 am

Thanks, and to TGR too. Maybe there's a little light at the end of the tunnel?

2 points
2
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:52 am

Absolutely, man!

SF moved Tarvarius Moore to CB straight out of the gate, as a rookie. Why? Because they had Richard Sherman on their roster, in his later years, and they wanted him to help turn Tarvarius into a CB with his style of play.

That was really, really stupid. Moore is a great Safety, and what they should have done is have Richard Sherman help Moore to be the best Nate McMillian he could be at S!!!

I think we're getting a player more closely compared to McMillian from that awesome SEA secondary, back in the day. That's the model we should be looking to in Moore's further development. I think Tarvarius' signing was a stroke of genius by Gutekunst, who I believe has one of the best Pro Personnel Scouting Departments in the NFL.

Moore literally has all the physical gifts for that kind of development to be realized. We'll see.

I love that the signing likely solves one need problem at S. We definitely had two problems there. Drafting another to pair with Moore would be very smart, especially with this particular class of Safeties. There are 5-6 really good ones there to be had in April.

Pass rush needs to be added along with S to make it work, though.

A lot of needs on this Packers team.

THAT's why I want to trade down from 15. There's one helluva sweet spot in this draft Late R1 all the way through R2. A trade down of say 10 draft positions could yield some big help for our Packers. Use our R3++ to trade back up into R2 for another bite at the apple.

3 points
3
0
T7Steve's picture

March 21, 2023 at 11:22 am

Yes, safety won't matter if we don't get a reliable quick rush to the passer. A good safety will help relieve anxiety for the pass-rushers about the run too. Win-Win. Complimentary football.

3 points
3
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 21, 2023 at 06:22 am

Ugh. Cap talk ruins my drafturbation.
:-D
Just for fun, I decided to see what I could end up with if I traded with the goal in mind to get as many picks as possible from 100-200. I used PFF and just accepted other people's offers, and ended up with so many picks that my final haul was drafting an entire TEAM (minus one center, guard, and punter). Plus, I still ended up with 43 Darnell Washington, 74 Jordan Battle, 81 Sam LaPorta, and 88 A.T. Perry! (in the 100s I got some more good players: Ji'Ayir Brown, YaYa Diaby, Zack Kuntz, Andrew VoorHees, Jonathan Mingo, Carter Warren, DeWane McBride, Jake Haener, K.J. Henry, Bryce Ford-Wheaton, Davis Allen, Hunter Luepke, Moro Ojomo, Kobie Turner, Robert Beal, Daniel Scott, Chamarri Conner, Carrington Valentine, Jakorian Bennett, Stetson Bennett, Jake Moody, Eric Gray, and Braeden Daniels!)

But obviously, we could never sign all of those guys with our cap problems.
:-D

4 points
4
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 06:31 am

PEO, L to the freaking OL!!!

Just for kicks, I’ve been thinking of building one of my own mocks straight up, without 13 or 43. Kind of soften the blow, in case the trade doesn’t happen.

We’re in a weird place.

There are so many great players I’d like to see us take, trading down from 15 might be our best bet.

On a positive note, personally, I received my Athlon 2033 Draft Preview Magazine in the mail last night!!!

Man, I hadn’t had that happen in years as I always got online subscriptions. Made me feel like a kid again. Athlon’s my jam.

4 points
4
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:08 am

Candidate for Deletion (great username and a wonderful poster) wrote a fanpost on APC a few years ago in which he traded and traded until he got every pick in the fourth round. Might have the 3rd, but I think it was the fourth round (BDU probably remembers). Then he drafted the 32 guys some comp picks, IIRC.

4 points
4
0
BirdDogUni's picture

March 22, 2023 at 07:31 am

Lol... I remember.

He had the whole 4th round. Think it was First-Pick, but they aren't around any more.

I haven't talked to him on the phone recently. I need to call him! ; )

0 points
0
0
TKWorldWide's picture

March 21, 2023 at 08:56 pm

I’ve been doing some of those simulators and it’s hard to figure where those trade proposals come from!
Not unusual to get offered two fourths, three fifths, a sixth, a seventh, and a second next year in exchange for this year’s third. Yowza!

0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

March 21, 2023 at 06:48 am

Trade Bahktiari and Clark for picks. They both have a short shelf life at this point. Trade or cut Savage. I also would have traded Jones but it’s too late now , I suppose. They need to start the rebuild and stop pretending they are contenders.

-3 points
2
5
Packers0808's picture

March 21, 2023 at 07:18 am

I suppose we could just cancel the season and forfeit all the games as well.

3 points
4
1
Coldworld's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:45 am

You can trade savage if you can find a team willing to pay his option specified contract as a rental, but the option means cutting him just cements the cap his now. It is fully guaranteed.

1 points
1
0
stockholder's picture

March 21, 2023 at 06:57 am

If a team goes over the salary cap,
they are fined upwards of five million dollars
for each violation of the cap.
In more severe scenarios,
draft picks can be confiscated
entirely and player contracts can be voided.

2 points
4
2
Coldworld's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:49 am

We are not over. Were we, we couldn’t sign or trade anyone either. The point here is we will be at our ceiling at some point as things stand per TGR’s calculations.

These are based on Rodgers being traded. If he is not then we need another 9 million to release him unless he retires formally. This is one reason why we aren’t in as strong a position as many think in the Jets stand off—Murphy has us backed into a tighter corner than many think. The Jets undoubtedly know this.

If anyone still has any doubt that the Rodgers extension was anything other than idiotic after reading this then I give up. The same goes for realistic contention until we can field a roster not cobbled together with cap bargain bail twine. Thank you Mark Murphy. The sooner you leave town the better.,

3 points
4
1
Bearmeat's picture

March 21, 2023 at 12:31 pm

THIS

0 points
1
1
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 12:55 pm

The only thing the Packers have working for us here is that their billionaire owner, Woody Johnson, backed his Jets into a corner too.

To me, the Packers & Jets may realize they have more to gain by hammering out a fair deal now than they might have thought with all the leverage banter bandied about.

Just fucking bang it out. Both teams need each other to be perfect trading partners, not adversarial nitwits.

0 points
1
1
BirdDogUni's picture

March 21, 2023 at 01:10 pm

I've said it before, but they might have already done so and just won't announce until Draft Day, for the shock factor for both fanbases...

Maybe Gutey wants it to go until 1 June for cap reasons? Maybe he wants next year's picks and Jets don't? We don't know what is happening, so it's even hard to speculate at this point.

Maybe there is a 3 way trade going on with another team and more moving parts than we had any idea. So many different scenarios and since nobody is leaking anything at all we can't speculate.

1 points
2
1
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 02:16 pm

Man, this trade will likely be one of the most magnanimous in NFL history.

Nobody knows shit, but, we all know some shit. I hope that clears things up for you. LOL!!!
(Originally forgot the LOL and didn't think I needed to clarify it was of lighthearted intent.)

-1 points
0
1
LambeauPlain's picture

March 21, 2023 at 09:27 am

The saga of what can happen when you placate one employee and go all in.

The Packers (especially MLF and Murphy), believed in 2021, the SB was just $150,000,000 away.

4 points
4
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:14 am

Remember the article I wrote in February of 2022 just before they gave AR the $150M much of it guaranteed? It was called "The Cap Suggests Moving On From Rodgers" IIRC. I thought I would get blasted in the comments, but those 119 comments were pretty thoughtful.

Never let your accountant or your cap guru run your business or your team. But you do need to know the numbers. If GB had won a super bowl....

3 points
3
0
Coldworld's picture

March 21, 2023 at 11:01 am

Ironically, our cap guru accountant negotiated these contracts and created this position!

2 points
2
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 21, 2023 at 12:27 pm

Not from me TGR. I'm on trade ACR from his outburst sh*t on the eve of 2021 draft. And I strongly supported your comment. I do not know much about SC and contract structures that influence on Salary Cap, but I believe you knows and I have confidence in your estimation (as you do not see all the contracts).

I agree. Accountants (and or cap gurus) need to do their job in accordance with main requests from the team and to prevent sh*ts like this cap issues. GMs should be given cap numbers and amounts of $ with what they can making crossword puzzles with players. CEOs (or owners) just need to count their earnings and leave football people to take care of football operations. Former players or not. It is not the job of economists. Their job is to make Titletown districts and similar projects.

1 points
1
0
Booner's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:16 am

Let Moe,,Larry and Curly work their magic!

What a bunch of numbskulls!

6 points
6
0
BirdDogUni's picture

March 21, 2023 at 01:11 pm

Curly Lambeau?

I'm in you... !

2 points
2
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 01:15 pm

Rut roh.

0 points
0
0
PatrickGB's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:48 am

Maybe part of the discussions with the Jets included some salary stuff. Or maybe the team will trade a player to get cap relief in exchange for a draft pick. It don’t look good right now. I hope 2024 looks better.

1 points
1
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 01:21 pm

hey Patrick!

The Jets cap is no cake walk. I think they are going to want to close this out by Draft Day 1, if not earlier. Their cap appears so tight, with what they are about to take on, and with another big fish left to secure onto their roster in Quinnen Williams, I bet they are dying to close this deal out now with GB. Probably more so than the Packers.

It's a leverage angle I had not considered prior to today. Oddly, it works in the Packers favor.

The Jets have insane urgency. If they can get us to take 13 and 43 for Rodgers... Getting the Packers to agree to make it happen pre draft, it would help them cross the finish line.

I'm sure they've been talking salary stuff, indeed! They might have more urgency than any of us originally thought.

0 points
0
0
Tedlyflyfisher's picture

March 21, 2023 at 11:50 am

Easy Peasy. Just raise the price of brats at Lambeau. Problem solved!

Trying to understand how teams manage salaries and the cap gives me a headache.

1 points
2
1
golfpacker1's picture

March 21, 2023 at 11:59 am

Wow you guys, Great questions, Answers, and Discussion. Alot of knowledge the Packers should know.
Here are mine for anyone.
What if we got #13 and traded for 2024 picks. Someone would give us alot. Next year Big draft, save $$ now.

Better to trade Bahk later in year or now for 2024 1st or multple 2nds. Big savings next year.

I have been looking @ teams that have Safety need for a trade of Savage. That seems to be the biggest cap hit we could save now. All teams have soured on some highly drafted players, Savage is ours. If the player coming back was not a 1st round pick it would be cheaper for us. I keep going back to trading Savage to Broncos for TE-Albert Okwuegbunam would fill a need, he makes $900,000 so we save $5 million trading Savage. Or someone else?

If we take a TE with the 1st round pick it would be ideal if we could trade back to late 1st or real early 2nd and gain picks. We probably miss on Washington or Mayer but everyone else would still be available. Save $$ either way and still get a starter. My early TE draft crush has been Kinkaid even if he isn't the best blocker. For me he can just stand in somebodies way if he catches 80 passes. Lately after watching highlights I really like Kraft followed by Mayer because they block really well and catch everything too. How about a draft of Kraft, later Schoonmaker, later Whyle. Add Okwuegbunam and the TE room is rebuilt with 3 down TEs.

What if we could trade one Devondre Campbell and draft Jack Campbell or another good ILB in draft. Walker will be better this year and 2 good young LBs would be ok. What would we save moving Campbell and what could we get back? Picks or players?

We shouldn't sleep on Austin Allen-TE making the roster. He was Big Ten TE of the year in 2021. 6'8 260 TE
Also we should expect a jump from Devonte Wyatt and we even though Sean Rhyan was a disappointment last year, He was a highly rated OL prospect last year and i was happy when they picked him. He was a 3 year starter at left tackle for UCLA. I think he is a sleeper for us and if he plays this year its like he is a 2023 draft pick again.

2 points
2
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 01:33 pm

Hey goldpacker1.

There's a chance Savage actually helps save the day by accepting a contract extension, per TGR's The Packers Are Still Trying To Generate Enough Cap Space," piece from this morning.

I would like to see that happen. Today's NFL often runs on 3 good Safeties. He had a down year last year, but, maybe bounces back. Savage extending could help wipe out the $7.9M he's due in cash.

As for Campbell, I would keep him. He's the glue of that D.

2 points
2
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 04:11 pm

Acquit me of advocating for an extension of Savage! 😄

I suggested paying part of his salary so he'd look more enticing to some team we can dupe into paying the remainder of his guaranteed base salary. I wasn't trying to keep him in GB: I was trying to get him out of Dodge.

1 points
1
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 04:32 pm

Ha! My intent was only to give you credit for the possibilities, and that's it.

I'm the one who wants to keep him. Would be open to trading him if it's reached that point where he's not a fit in GB.

I was a huge fan of his drafting, and can see he hasn't met my own expectations. Was hoping we could somehow keep him and he'd realize a turnaround here in his play. Wasn't he injured last season? Thought he had a shoulder issue he was playing through.

As you and everyone here knows, I can screw up enough stuff just fine. I wouldn't intend to mess anyone else up here. More than happy to own my errors. My apologies.

Look at how nicely I did all those caps in your headline!!! That's respect.

1 points
1
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 21, 2023 at 12:23 pm

So, signing #13 is too rich for us? What is we traded it for AZ’s 34, 66, and 96?

If I understand you correctly, our cap is going to be tight, but we’re going to be able to conduct operations.

4 points
4
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 01:33 pm

I've done enough math lately. Just in my head and using OTC's estimates on the costs of draft picks, those three picks appear to save $1.6M on the cap over using just pick 13.

I can't put a 2nd link in. Add an https in the beginning or search overthecap NFL draft resources.

://overthecap.com/draft

3 points
3
0
RobinsonDavis's picture

March 21, 2023 at 08:52 pm

Great job, TGR! I love this analysis and the many thoughtful responses in this column! I will point out I am not a cap expert either, but your analysis make sense and is thorough.

My son and I have analyzed this to exhaustion and TGR's analysis is excellent in pointing to BOTH issues: The Packers have little cap room and need to still replace 9 of their top 36 players from last year. As I see it, 3 of these players may be on the roster currently. That means they have to replace 6 or 7 players through the draft or through free agency ...CHEAPLY. We also figured the Packers cannot afford a 1st round pick, especially a second 1st round potentially provided by the Jets for this year. However, they could trade these picks back easily if somebody wishes to collaborate, as well as trade back into next year, as has been discussed in this column's comments. We also suggested that they had the opportunity to trade a player or two which would make room for multiple lesser paid players, but this was prior to all the restructuring. It could happen, but less of a chance now.

IMO, Packers will trade back in the draft to obtain 8-9 picks vs. the current 6 over 5 rounds, with perhaps some pics falling into next year. If AR is traded, Packers would be well served to obtain multiple picks in 2024 and 2025, even if that means they have to trade back picks obtained for this year's draft.

1 points
1
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 01:34 pm

LH, I think the Packers will clear the room to add both #13 and #43. This gets done tout de suite.

1 points
1
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 21, 2023 at 12:29 pm

And how much might they clear with Crosby?

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 01:14 pm

Nothing. Crosby is a free agent. They already took a $1M dead money charge which cannot be undone.

But I forgot Crosby as well in the comp pick paragraph! He should get $2M or maybe a bit more. He is reliable so maybe a dome team will think his lack of length strength is offset by his accuracy up to 48 yards? Heck, he might get more than $2M. It will be interesting to see where his market is.

GB needs to sign a kicker as well. Or, since they no less than four 7th round picks, draft one or two.

2 points
2
0
BirdDogUni's picture

March 21, 2023 at 02:56 pm

Moody, Moody, Moody...

1 points
1
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 21, 2023 at 05:44 pm

Thanks TGR!

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 02:05 pm

The Packers signed Long Snapper Matt Orzech, who has been in the league for 4 seasons. Since they gave him a three year deal that included a $300K signing bonus, it would seem that they want and expect him to beat out Coco. Orzech has a $1.08M minimum base salary plus the $100K proration for a $1.18M cap number in 2023.

Coco has a minimum base salary of $870K with no other money involved, so that is his cap number as well.

Now it would seem that the guaranteed money would make this an uneven match, at least to the cynical. Here is the thing. If Orzech wins the job, the Packers will be spending $1.18M on the long snapping positions. If Coco wins the job, the Packers will be spending $1.17M on the long snapping position ($870K plus the $300K in guaranteed money). For the cynical, yeah, GMs sometimes don't like admitting mistakes and $300K this year is a noticeable amount of cap space.

Aw, that is not quite the full story. While accurate in a sense, if Coco wins the battle, the Packers will cut Orzech as a post June release, so only $100K of his signing bonus will count against the 2023 cap, making the cost of the long snapper $970K if Coco wins but with $200K dead in 2024. I liked the symmetry of $1.18M and $1.17M but alas, not to be. [I should probably take this comment as a sign that I should log off.]

Tarvarious Moore signed a qualified contract. His minimum normally would be $1.08M as I mentioned in the article, but it is reduced to $940K. GB also gave Moore a $50K signing bonus, so his cap number is $990K. So he is a little cheaper than I thought. I hope greengold is right about Moore.

1 points
1
0
PatrickGB's picture

March 21, 2023 at 02:21 pm

I am so confused! OTC seems to indicate that we have lots of cap room. https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 04:19 pm

Ain't that a bitch?

OTC thinks GB has $23M plus change at this point in time: march 21, 2023 at 4 pm. And they are probably close. But they don't care about signing 16 guys to the PS, which costs a min. of $3.456M, more if the Packers sign some veterans, because it hasn't happened yet. And OTC is not counting the cost to sign our draft picks, which won't happen until May and June. And OTC doesn't count the 52nd and 53rd player. And they don't count the cost of trading AR to anywhere, because that has not happened. And OTC doesn't worry about leaving cap space for players who go on IR or PUP.

I guess GB has the fourth most cap space in the NFL. That doesn't mean they have the 4th most effective cap space.

2 points
2
0
greengold's picture

March 21, 2023 at 04:27 pm

You are greatly appreciated. LOL.

Seriously, your article explaining all of this early this morning was like a piece of gold to this guy. The fact that you stretched it further to include other elements in discussions here, like those top two picks, the players on the roster who can actually help get the cap costs of both picks under our cap threshold, the workout bonuses that can yet be converted...

Top shelf.

0 points
0
0
golfpacker1's picture

March 21, 2023 at 02:35 pm

Do you think Amos made Savage worse last year or visa versa ? I have read that Amos has really lost a step. Also I read Savage was playing out of position. Was he? If we trade Savage can we find better safeties in FA this late?

And I would be thrilled if we got #13 and traded back for Arizona #34, #66, & #96. More swings of the bat. A TE looks alot better @ #34 and most will still be there. Then you have the extra 2 picks for a better WR and DT or ?
Instead of hoping someone falls to you later.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 21, 2023 at 04:23 pm

I am a cap guy. To the extent I have a strength, cap is it. For player evals or scheme fits, ask Nags, Jersey Al, or a film guy who watches All-22 and might be able to see a difference between Amos in 2021 and Amos in 2022. Dusty, Andy Herman, and there are some guys on you tube and elsewhere who might have an informed opinion. And then one might need to know if Amos had a nagging injury.

I only think I know that Savage played well for a stretch of time in 2020. Since then, not so great. Why? IDK.

1 points
1
0
Packers0808's picture

March 21, 2023 at 06:24 pm

When did this site start throwing out posts they don't like or hurts their little feelings?

-3 points
0
3
BirdDogUni's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:37 pm

What did you say?

Lol

0 points
0
0
Rarescope's picture

March 21, 2023 at 10:47 pm

I had a comment removed once for making a female member of the family type joke to Pantz_burp. I can see why but I was hoping Jersey Al would have had a better sense of humor . It wasn’t that bad and Pantz burp and I were always joking back and forth. Don’t see him much in the off-season I hope he comes back this fall.

0 points
0
0
Packers0808's picture

March 22, 2023 at 07:18 am

Something about if we trade or lose all the players mentioned we might forfeit the season. Was in jest!

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 22, 2023 at 01:28 am

I don't have the ability to erase comments written by others. Jersey Al does, and I imagine Nags and Corey Behnke do.

0 points
0
0