Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

The True Options for Jimmy Graham & Nick Perry

By Category

The True Options for Jimmy Graham & Nick Perry

It’s more than safe to say that Nick Perry and Jimmy Graham didn’t live up to their contracts in 2018. In fact, Nick Perry ended up as my second lowest graded player on defense, and my lowest graded defensive player on a per-play basis. Jimmy Graham wasn’t much better. He was my third lowest graded player on offense, and at the end of the day not only were both players disappointing, but they actually hurt their team more than they actually helped it.

What makes this so much more concerning is that both players have large contracts remaining and both have a large chunk of guaranteed money coming to them regardless of whether Green Bay hangs on to them or not. This has led many people to assume that Green Bay would be better off just hanging on to both players, rather than taking the cap hit and paying them a significant amount of money not to play for the Packers.

The truth is that both decisions are much more complex than what they may seem on the surface. On the surface, Nick Perry is on the books for $14,437,500.00 in 2019, while carrying a dead cap hit of $11,100,000.00 if released. So the question would seem to be, would you rather pay Nick Perry $14 million to play for the Packers, or $11 million to cut him?

It’s a similar situation (on the surface) for Jimmy Graham. His 2019 cap hit is set to be $12,666,666.00 for 2019, while his dead cap hit would be $7,333,334.00 if he were to be released. So again, would you rather pay him $12.7 million to play for you or $7.3 million to not play for you?

When looking at the base numbers it seems like an obvious decision; the cap savings simply isn’t large enough to release either player, and the conclusion would seem to be to hang on to Perry & Graham at least one more year and hope that Perry comes back healthy and Graham flourishes in a new offense.

But in order to truly make an educated decision on either player, you really need to look at the entire contract, and what it would truly cost to keep both players.

Also, before we get too far into this, there is less than a zero percent chance that either player restructures their contract or has any trade value. Both contracts would not be favorable to any team trading for them and both players would be incredibly unwise to take any type of pay cut. They both have large enough guarantees that it would be much more beneficial for them to be released, collect the guaranteed money, and sign another contract with a new team rather than restructure with Green Bay. So let’s rule those two options out right now.

So all that being said, let’s take a deep dive into these contracts, and try and figure out if either player is worth keeping around in 2019.

Nick Perry

Per Spotrac, Nick Perry’s contract looks like this:

Perry’s remaining guaranteed money is completely tied up in the signing bonus. If Green Bay were to release him they would save every penny, save for the $11,100,000.00 that he is due via his signing bonus. (Note that we are only talking salary cap here, not how he is actually paid out in true cash).

There’s no easy way to look at this, but the easiest way is to look at what options Green Bay truly has. Perry has three years left on his deal. So at the simplest level, Green Bay can either release Perry, keep him 1 more year, keep him 2 more years, or keep him all three years of the deal. When we break it down that way, we can see much easier how much of the salary cap that Perry would take up to keep him as a Green Bay Packer.

3 Years - $42,837,500.00 - $14,279,166.67.00/year

If Green Bay decided to keep Perry in Green Bay for all three years, the contract would look exactly like it does above and he would make $42,837,500.00 for three years of play, at an average per year of $14,279,166.67.00.

2 years - $32,437,500.00 - $16,218,750.00/year

This is where it starts to get a little bit complex. If you look at the chart above, Perry would have a cap hit of $14,437,500.00 in 2019 and $14,300,000.00 in 2020. So these two totals combined would be $28,737,500.00. But in this scenario, where he plays only two years, it assumes that Green Bay releases him in year three which means they would still owe him his 2021 bonus of $3,700,000.00. So the truth is, for two years of play, Green Bay would pay him $32,437,500.00.

1 year - $21,837,500.00 - $21,837,500.00/year

So as in the 2-year scenario above, you cannot just look at the one year contract value. As I mentioned at the beginning, on the surface it looks like a 1 year - $14,437,500.00 deal for this year, but you have to take into account that Green Bay would still be on the hook for $7,400,000.00 in signing bonus money if they released him after this season. So if Green Bay kept him just this season, and then released him in 2020, they would ultimately have a cap hit of $21,837,500.00 for just one season of play.

Release - $11,100,000.00

If Green Bay were to release Nick Perry outright, they would have to pay him $11,100,000.00. Now there are options in each of these scenarios to split the cap hit up over time, but ultimately you are robbing Peter to pay Paul, and you’d still end up taking the cap hit down the road.

So which option would you rather have?

0 years - $11,100,000.00
1 year – $21,873,500.00
2 years - $32,437,500.00
3 years - $42,837,500.00

The unfortunate truth is that Green Bay has to pay that $11.1 million bonus no matter what. The fortunate truth is they don’t have to pay him a dime of the other $31.7+ million if they take their medicine now and move on from the bad contract. $11.1 million is never easy to swallow, but it’s ultimately the best option of the four.

Jimmy Graham

Per Spotrac, Jimmy Graham’s remaining contract looks like this:

Like Perry, Graham’s guarantees are completely tied to his signing bonuses. No matter what happens, Green Bay will have to take the $7,333,334.00 cap hit over the next two seasons. There is no way out of that money. Like Perry, let’s take a look at the three options that Green Bay has with Jimmy Graham:

2 years - $24,333,334.00 - $12,166,667.00/year

Again, this is the easy one. If Green Bay keeps Graham for both years the contract will play out as-is and there’s nothing too complex about it. At this point it’s a 2-year deal worth $24.3 million and an average value of $12.2 million per year.

1 year - $16,333,334.00 - $16,333,334.00/year

Once again, this is the same exact idea as Nick Perry. If they keep him this year he would play out this season with a cap hit of $12,666,666.00 and when he’s released next year he would have a cap hit of the remaining signing bonus which would be $3,666,668.00. So in total they’d pay $16,333,334.00 for only one season of Jimmy Graham.

Release - $7,333,334.00

If they were to release Graham this season they’d of course still owe the $7,333,334.00 but they would save the remainder of the contract; thus saving a total of $17 million over the course of the next two seasons.

So again, which option would you rather have?

0 years - $7,333,334.00
1 year - $16,333,334.00
2 years - $23,333,334.00

It’s a very tough pill to swallow again to take a $7.3+ million cap hit and get absolutely nothing in return. But of the three options that are available, it’s still probably the best. Paying $16 million for one season of Graham is massively overpaying, even if you only get a portion of the money back.

It should of course be noted that with June 1st designations that many times they can split these cap hits over multiple seasons. But as I mentioned above, you’re simply delaying the cap hits until the future and it still ends up hurting in the end. Green Bay would be wise to release both Graham and Perry in 2019, and take the full cap hit this season. Green Bay won’t struggle for cap space, and better to take the medicine now and set yourself up better for 2020.

It’s never, ever easy to release players, take huge cap hits, and get nothing in return, but faced with the choices above, it’s absolutely time to move on from Graham and Perry now, rather than later.

__________________________

Andy is a graduate of UW-Oshkosh and owns & operates the Pack-A-Day Podcast. Andy has taken multiple courses in NFL scouting and appears weekly on 107.5 The Fan in Green Bay to breakdown film. This past season he was an analyst on Green Bay Nation on WFRV TV in Green Bay. Andy grew up in Green Bay and is a lifelong season ticket holder; follow him on Twitter at @sconniesports.

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 7 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (162) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Lphill's picture

cut ties with Perry, keep Graham lets see if new coaching can get more out of him, I dont think coaching will help Perry, its just too many injuries.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

This was my initial impression too. Graham could be better with coaches who know how to scheme for him. Perry is just awful. Spread the damage out over 2 years.

Rak47's picture

Graham and Perry are both vastly over paid with the difference being Graham still has some use/value. He was still drawing double teams and produces more than any other TE they've had since Finley. Perry on the other hand was a complete and total waste of a roster space. The Packers need to take him and his agent to court and sue their asses for falsely impersonating a football player, extortion, and highway robbery. Not a jury in the world that wouldn't convict them and order them to pay back the money they stole.

ricky's picture

The Packers stupidly thought that contract year effort could be projected to future results. This is not Luca Brasi holding a gun to TT's head and being told either his name or his brains will be on the contract. Why should Perry or his agent turn down all that money? Because they're nice guys? Or its the right thing to do? Fine. The next time a player vastly overperforms his contract, lets all be there backing him up when he holds out for more money, because he deserves it. Which will happen when pigs are headlining at La Scala.

Handsback's picture

Ricky, I agree but will add that Packer management may have felt they were out of options and Perry was the only answer.
I have no idea if it's a fact, but could be the explanation on why they did it.
I'll say this about the TEs for the Packers....they never schemed them for the middle of the field and never took the advantage that should have been there.

ricky's picture

The Packers stupidly thought that contract year effort could be projected to future results. This is not Luca Brasi holding a gun to TT's head and being told either his name or his brains will be on the contract. Why should Perry or his agent turn down all that money? Because they're nice guys? Or its the right thing to do? Fine. The next time a player vastly overperforms his contract, lets all be there backing him up when he holds out for more money, because he deserves it. Which will happen when pigs are headlining at La Scala.

Rak47's picture

Cut Perry , draft and edge player and do what you have to do to bring Za'Darius Smith or preferably Preston Smith to GB next year short of overpaying grossly.

Rak47's picture

Btw, it is being reported the Packers have hired Adam Stenavich as offensive line coach. He spent the last 2 years as an assistant line coach in San Fran. Oh, and Jeff Blasko went to the Browns. Who would've ever guessed?

Rak47's picture

It's also being reported LaFluer has hired Kirk Olivadotti ,LB's coach from the Redskins.

Barnacle's picture

The bonuses aka dead money is gone, ignore it when deciding to keep Perry and Graham. We must decide if we should pay Perry an extra $10,000,000 to play one more year or pay Graham an extra $9,000,000 to play another year. I do not think either of them is worth another year. Therefore, I vote to cut both of them.

If our FO wants to spread the Cap over future years so they don’t appear so incredibly incompetent on these two contracts, I would vote against that also. Pay for our stupidity and move forward.........hopefully a little wiser?

HankScorpio's picture

That's right. The "dead money' is already gone from the Packers bank and landed in the respective players' banks. It is pure accounting gimmick of the CBA. Perry and Graham have no guaranteed money in their contracts. Every penny they are due to receive under their current deals will be saved if the Packers cut them by the start of the league year.

TGR wrote a very accurate accounting of the cap ramifications of their release. The cash ramifications are not the same.

The TKstinator's picture

I too am on the “cut both” train.

Guam's picture

I disagree with one crucial assessment Andy. You said neither player has an incentive to take a pay cut because of the guaranteed money owed by the Packers. I believe neither player has any guaranteed CASH due to them. The "dead money" is not cash to the player or the Packers. It is the pro-rate (accounting allocation) of the signing bonus which was paid in full and in cash at the start of the player's contract.

TGR has an excellent explanation of Perry's contract further down in the thread and I believe much of that explanation also applies to Graham. Both players have some incentive to take a pay cut if they believe they will not get paid much by other teams due to their recent poor performance. I think Green Bay has some leverage to renegotiate if the player is realistic about their value on the free agent market.

carlos's picture

Interesting Guam. It makes sense. I’ve had enough of both, but what a tough call by the Packers organization. The call is more complex due to a new coaching staff and Rogers not getting any younger. Also I’m always thinking they’ll turn it around. Graham clips actually made him look foolish and shouldn’t have been on a NFL football field so he’d need a totally different scheme. Hate to see them go somewhere like other players in the past who went on to improving and helping another team. My gut says get rid of both and cut your losses.

Guam's picture

I am in favor of cutting both, but the new coaching staff may want to retain one or both under a revised contract. I think that option is open to the Packers if the players are receptive to renegotiation. Andy doesn't agree, but I think that option is available.

carlos's picture

Must look at all options. They’re big decisions.

GBPDAN1's picture

TT made so many blunders the last 4 or so years with this team. The Perry contract is horrible. And if TT didn't let the only TE (Cook) that was worth keeping since Finley go, we wouldn't have had to waste money on Bennett and Graham ( and he wasted 3 rd pick on R. Rodgers).

Murphy took to long to move on from Ted.

Point Packer's picture

"Murphy took to long to move on from Ted."

Murphy takes too long to move on from everyone.

Coldworld's picture

Murphy is responsible for all that has occurred. It seems likely that he would have gone with Ball for GM were it not for pressure from within. Think on that one. Building title town district is not an excuse (and led by non football side personnel in reality). Murphy needs to be held accountable.

Johnblood27's picture

with players it is: Better to release them a year too soon than a year too late.

With management it is: Keep them until they completely breakdown and become less than worthless.

Bad organizational attitude for a winning football franchise.

carlos's picture

We shouldn’t be signing free agents who are in that “time zone “ of their careers. Especially for three years.

Rak47's picture

I find it ironic that the FO wants to remove all traces of complacency from the previous regime yet Mark Murphy still has his job. Talk about Mr. complacent himself, lol. Took him 3 years too long to cann TT and 2 years too long to fire MM. If that's not complacency I don't know what is.

carlos's picture

Maybe Ted beat him up once a week.

PeteK's picture

Let's be fair , the vast majority of Packer fans thought the Bennett signing was excellent.

zoellner25's picture

Get rid of them both. Need younger, faster, more explosive players. That film is atrocious. How could our 2018 coaches have allowed this? Complacency seems to have been an understatement

Point Packer's picture

Ted at the end of his time as GB GM was a complete and utter disaster. Obviously Graham is on Gute, but that contract to Perry was a horrendous decision.

That being said, I think GB would be wise to keep both of those schmucks around for one more year given the dead money hit.

Bert's picture

I don't know what's worse. Taking the dead money hit or keeping dead wood with dead asses type players. Personally I would dump the dead asses and take the hit. We need to upgrade the roster with guys who want to play and win before we can move forward.

zoellner25's picture

It also sends a statement to players that complacency will not be tolerated, no matter the cap hit. Get rid of bad players. MM was so loyal to veteran players they allowed this type of play and did not correct it.

Old School's picture

A complete and utter disaster?? Let's look at the last draft he oversaw as a GM:

In a 7 round draft, he drafted 7 players who are still active in the league.

Kevin King is a starting caliber corner who has battled injuries.
Jamaal Williams and Aaron Jones are a good 1-2 punch at RB.
Josh Jones and Montravious Adams played hundreds of snaps for us on defense and special teams.

If that's what a complete and utter disaster looks like, how would you describe the Titanic?

Rak47's picture

The Jury is still out on Kevin King although if he stays healthy I think he can be a shutdown CB. Jamal Williams is a journeyman type player nothing more. And Josh Jones and Montravious Adams have been disappointments so far and may not even make the team next year depending on who Gute brings in. I'd say TT's last draft look similar at this point to his previous 3 before that.

Rak47's picture

And the TT barnacles strike again!!!

Cubbygold's picture

Jones and Adams only played because of injuries and a lost season. No way they see the field for a competitive team.

King, jury is out but if we're redrafting he's not going in the first three rounds.

Williams is alright, but nothing special.

If all you're getting out of 7 players is some decent fillers and Aaron Jones, you're not doing it right. If King can put a full year together it changes things dramatically. He was mostly healthy in college, so I have hope.

Old School's picture

So Josh Jones and Montravious Adams wouldn't see the field for a decent team. Gotcha.

A top pick, two years in, and you've seen enough. No chance they might improve next year at all. None.

Citizen AJ's picture

Old school you forget one thing , quality of performance . Did this team improve because of this draft ? I think the record speaks for itself .

dobber's picture

It's a cyclical argument: they're on the roster, so they must be good. And they're good because they're on the roster.

I'm not completely out on some of those players--and I'll give a little bit based on scheme changes on D--but the bottom line is this team gets better in 2019 if some of those guys step it up and stay healthy. Second year might be iffy for them, but third year should be enough to know what you've got.

freddisch's picture

Thanks for this clear and concise explanation of the options which GB has concerning these two players. Agree cut both now and move on

Coldworld's picture

Both arguments made are premised on a key assumption, neither of which is necessarily valid. In light of the very unpalatable costs of release, those assumptions are critical to any actual decision because they go to the heart of the potential future on field value.

In the case of Graham: he was horribly used in a scheme that was disjointed and predictable. He made some big plays called back for unrelated (often invalid) reasons and still racked up over 600 yards. If Rodgers couldn’t make the O click singlehandedly, is it reasonable to expect Graham? Add to that playing him with a splint was unwise and proved that at the expense of playing time for Tonyon.

We can’t undo the signing: that’s history. The question is can Graham provide real value this season if used effectively. I believe he can. I think the new coaching regime will be important for getting the best from him as it will be for Rodgers. For that reason I would retain him.

Perry can perform. He was apparently injured all season. If so, I see no sense in cutting him. Again, we are on the hook, his contract is in place. If he was debilitated, cutting him is throwing money down the pan at this point. This is not a question of should we retain him with his injury history were he a free agent. This is a question of whether he can be a threat. Unless the Packers staff know that his injuries have reduced his physical abilities long term, cutting at this point would be truly self defeating. We need more depth not less and at the dead money cost, we need to consider the whole picture.

Doubt this will be popular but it needs to be said.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I think it is reasonable to believe that Perry playing for GB in 2019 has some value. See my article and my comment below.

Jonathan Spader's picture

Russ Ball has been called a wizard for keeping GB's contracts team friendly. I thought at the time that the Cobb signing was a good one. He went off on 2014 and didn't seem to be injury prone at that point in his career. After looking at these 2 contracts is Ball overrated? Did we need to extend Rodgers?

Hated the Nick Perry contract from day 1. It's like when the Packers drafted and you thought well that was a reach I really hope they know something I don't.

I was excited about the Graham signing. I thought SO many tall athletic weapons how the hell do you stop the Packers especially in the red zone. Got my answer in 2018 AR + MM = 0 weapon usage.

Haven't been able to decide if you keep or cut these players. After reading your breakdown I feel like I'm being screwed either way. Just makes me more upset at how we wound up in this situation by ignoring TE and OLB in the draft for years.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I knew the Perry structure was not team friendly. Given the dearth of talent at OLB when Perry signed, my attitude was to bend over and yell repeatedly: Thank you Sir, may I have another?

I was dubious about Graham. All my reservations so far have come to pass. I gave Gute a D- for signing Graham. Just way too much money. Structure isn't that bad except it doesn't have an easy one year out. It has a painful one.

Jonathan Spader's picture

That was graphic TGR lol. The dearth of talent at OLB is what really frustrated me. It's not as important with Pettine but it was everything to Capers. I want to see what Pettine can do with actual pass rushers regardless of if they're on the DL or LBers. He has a brilliant scheme but lacks healthy talent.

Rak47's picture

Weren't both of those deals put together by our so called cap guru Russ Ball. I think in Grahams case at least Murphy had to approve of them spending as much as they did. Ted was most likely responsible for approving Perry's deal though.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Cobb's was not an unreasonable structure. Ball is going to have to stop using the signing bonus as the only guaranteed money in a contract. It makes it very hard to have a two year out in most contracts of any size. Cobb was coming off such a huge season that getting a team-friendly structure with an easy 2-year out was going to be very difficult.

Jonathan Spader's picture

Agreed TGR

Since '61's picture

Andy - thanks for the excellent analysis as usual. Chuck them both. Continue with the house cleaning.
Moving on them now gives us the opportunity to get younger and more athletic players in their positions.

Yes, the cap hits will hurt this year but the flip side is the opportunity to improve two position groups now. These are 2 players with very little to zero upside left to give to the Packers. If it wasn't for the cap hits the right decision without question is to chuck them both. Money should not be a factor in making the right decision for the team. Move on and get younger and better players. Go Pack Go! Thanks, Since '61

Old School's picture

If we take the cap hits this year, that's money which we cannot use to pursue other FAs.

I disagree that Graham has very little upside. This is a guy who was the 2nd leading receiver of the 9th best passing offense. He finished the season in the Top 10 among TEs in the main measures like yards, receptions, and yards/catch average.

And at the end of the season, when he had a broken hand and we were out of the playoffs, he was out there fighting instead of collecting his money on IR. IMO, that counts for something.

Johnblood27's picture

are you frickin blind?

have you watched any of the games or seen any of the video of grahams effort on 90% of the plays where he is falling down or standing still and barely touching defenders in an attempt to look like he is playing football.
on plays he actually catches a pass he immediately goes down on his own or gets tackled?

2nd leading? best of a bunch of part-time playtime rookies? WTF kind of thought process comes up with that kind of comment?

top 10 of a group of 5 quality players and a bunch of absolute stiffs. TE is going the way of the FB. No use in todays offenses. Just use a big WR. Only use a true TE when needed for blocking, so no need to get anything other than a blocking TE.

If you want to run the ball, having a FB and a TE is a good idea. Trying to get a FB and a TE that can compete with the athleticism of todays defenses and be a true offensive threat while still having use in the run game of be adequate pass blockers is just silly.

If you can catch lightening in a bottle and get one of the only 5 or so humans that can perform all of the TE duties at a high level, then scheme an offense with that weapon involved. If not stop trying to fool yourself into believing that your guy is one of those rare gifts.

Just have a couple specialized players on the roster and use them appropriately.

Yeah, maybe the defense has an idea of whats coming, but if your specialty players are good at their slim skill set you can still win the down on execution.

Way better philosophy.

kevgk's picture

You had some good things to say, but your analysis of TEs in the modern NFL is way off. They don't get a lot of credit, but they are big players in the best offenses for a reason.

Old School's picture

No, I'm not blind but thanks for asking.

I watch these games, and rewatch, and focus on things. So does a guy named Ross Uglem, who writes here, and he's noticed things about Graham's contributions, too, that you apparently don't see.

Making Graham a scapegoat for our offensive problems last year is wrong. You can't explain how his numbers are Top 10 for TEs....despite all the things that were so wrong with the offense that we had to fire the HC midseason....if he's half as bad as you apparently believe.

I think he's overpaid, but that's not his fault. I think some people overvalue the TE spot. That's why we have a perpetual string of people who are disappointed with our TE.

Before Graham, our starter was Martellus Bennett. Then it was Cook, who missed half the season but came on great at the end. Then it was Richard Rodgers, who caught over 50 balls in his second season, including that miracle in Detroit. We didn't like him either.

Before that, we had Jermichael Finley. A tall fast guy who ALMOST made numerous incredible plays. Reality of his time in Green Bay?

Six seasons, 96 games of which he only was available for 70 and he started 46 times.

His two best seasons were 2011 and 2012, where he was available for all 16 games and caught 55 and 61 passes for a little over 700 yards/season. That's almost identical to Graham, this year.

In 2000, we drafted Bubba Franks in the first round. He made the Pro Bowl 3 straight years. Fans derided him for not getting much in the way of YAC and being slow (and I assure you, Graham is a helluva lot faster than Bubba, still.)

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

On top of Graham's all around poor play there are two other points no one mentions:

1. How did he break his hand? In a scrum after play with a Seattle player on sideline. Really?
2. How many tipped balls from Graham that were very catchable bounce off his hands end up as interceptions? Oh, that is right...2 of them! The total number of interceptions Rodgers gave up the entire year!

Graham is so completely washed up. If for no other reason MM should have been fired for Jones not being used effectively, and for Tonyan not being played particularly after Graham was injured. Let's see....Graham can no longer run effectively, cannot jump, bad hands, minimal athletism anymore and is a very marginal blocker? Why did Tonyan sit on bench?

Old School's picture

So, if it's completely obvious to you that Graham is washed up, how is it
that experienced professionals in the personnel business disagreed?

Gutekunst signed him to a big deal and I guarantee you that if we cut him loose that he'll be starting for somebody else next season.

Bad hands? Have you compared his catch percentage? IF he's so slow, how'd he get open often enough to be a Top 10 TE in receptions?

Essentially, you're asking me to believe you or the people who actually know stuff. I'll pick them, if that's OK with you.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Old School,
So who are the experienced professionals who disagree? You do not name any to back up your statement. Convient!

Could Graham start for someone next year? Sure if team is desperate for a TE and if they can get him on the cheap.

Once again you do not provide his catch percentage. Send the link! I will say stats can always be used conveniently to bolster one's argument. Sure he caught wide open throws but so does everyone. He CANNOT make contested throws any longer. He cannot jump. Go back and watch tape. Most every poster here agrees as they have watched Graham all year.

On why he was in top 10 in receptions for a TE? Easy....MM and Rodgers kept feeding him the ball because MM couldn't figure out Graham was washed up. Just one more reason MM was fired in middle of the season.

4thand10's picture

All of the remaining teams with the exception of the Rams have and use the FBs on their roster.

Jonathan Spader's picture

We used a FB in 2018 his name was Lance Kendericks.

carlos's picture

To add to that Blood 27, MLF offensives like to run the football. Graham doesn’t seem like the right fit for that or tight bunched formations. He’d probably struggle to get off the line and other teams know all his weaknesses. May get knocked around by a defense.

Since '61's picture

Old school - if we keep them we can’t use the money to sign FAs either. And we end up with 2 players who hurt the team rather than help the team win.

Even when Perry is heathy he is a non-entity and contributes nothing on defense. As for Graham, he was responsible for the only 2 picks Rodgers had for the entire season. He is an awful blocker, he is too slow and he no longer has good hands.

Why do we want these guys on the team? Gute stayed that this is a performance business. If you don’t perform you’re gone. Perry has not performed since his contract season and Graham had a negative performance season. Chuck them both and move on is the correct decision for the team. BTW, the Latin root of the word decision is cis, which in English means to cut. Let the cutting and chucking begin. Thanks, Since ‘61

JimR_in_SoCal's picture

To paraphrase Since '61, the Opportunity Cost of keeping Perry & Graham is too damn high.

Swisch's picture

Interesting word origin: Perhaps decision is related to incision.
A form of incision may be incisive -- as in, "The passionate Packers fans at Cheesehead TV contributed many incisive comments about their beloved team."
We can only hope that the front office and our coaching staff take a peek here from time to time to get cutting-edge ideas ;-).
Actually, it would seem a good idea for management to listen to its most loyal customers, at least a little.
I wouldn't make football decisions based on what the fans are saying; but then again, I wouldn't ignore the fans altogether.

The TKstinator's picture

“decision related to incision”: You sound like a Swisch Army knife! I like the way you cut to the chase. Slice through that red tape, muchacho!

Old School's picture

Jimmy Graham is clearly better than half the starting TEs in this league by any measure you'd like to apply. I understand that under the author's subjective appraisal system, Graham doesn't rate well, but he outperformed most of the TEs in the league in terms of yards, catches, and yards/catch.

Perry, when he's healthy, helps the team. I don't think anybody disputes that.

Like I've said, Graham's contract was designed to have a two year out after the 2019 season. Here's an idea: Let's honor the contract.

I can't understand why so many people think you improve the team by creating dead money.

Gutekunst signed him to a 3 year, $30 million deal. Now, a year into it, you want Gutekunst to say " I screwed up" and cut Graham loose, The $11 million guaranteed is gone. We're creating $7+ million in dead money in order to save the roster bonus and his salary....total $9 million.

And then we'd still have to pay his replacement. After the 2019 season, we can cut him but right now I just think it's really shortsighted.

NitschkeFan's picture

Sorry but they were not a good passing team this year. By the metrics that correlate with Winning, QB rating 13th, Yards Per Pass Attempt 17th. No surprise they were 6-9-1.

Old School's picture

So, average by those metrics. 9th in passing offense by NFL stats. Better than average. Football Outsiders has us at a little better than average, passing wise.

I think our crappy special teams probably meant the difference between 6-9-1 and 9-6-1, Here's the thing. \..….our passing offense was one of strengths of the team, along with protecting the ball and getting to the QB. We also had a good yards/rush attempt.

Skip greenBayless's picture

Whole lotta chuckin' going on.

Dash

Free agent's picture

Don’t make me, Up Chuck

Otto's picture

I would like to know, between all the coaches being paid to not coach in GB and the players being paid to not play in GB (or their salary cap hit), how much money is going out door this season to yield 0 productivity for this team?

Maybe it's time for the business management of the GBP organization to be reviewed?

dobber's picture

Imagine what it's like for franchises that seem to roll their coaching staff over every 3-4 years...

Packer Fan's picture

Wow, this shows that it is better to take a hit in one year then keeping them around for multiple years. Out with Perry. Let LaFluer decide if he can use Graham more the MM did.

Coldworld's picture

It shows that if one doesn’t look at all the potentially relevant facts it can be easy to conclude things that may be completely absurd, such as flushing money irrevocably down the drain and having to survive with dead money that can’t be used to better the team with two more holes on the depth chart.

carlos's picture

Good point fan

albert999's picture

GREAT article!
I would drop them both and take the combined 8.8m savings and get one free agent OL or ER with that money

Jonathan Spader's picture

For the FA OL Clowney and Lawrence are your upgrades both unlikely to hit the market and both more expensive than Perry. Ansah is likelier to hit the open market but has been as injury prone as Perry. For the draft it forces you to draft for position rather than BPA like the fans screaming for Perry's cut clamor for. I'm only 35 why do I sound like Old School lol.

dobber's picture

With the injuries this team seems to incur, having their own ER might be a wise investment.

Old School's picture

I think you go ahead and move on from Perry. Graham is more complicated.

He is our starting TE. He was the second leading receiver of the 9th rated passing offense. He was brought here to catch passes, not for his blocking.

I think there was dysfunction in the offense. I'd also mention the comments between Lewis and Kendricks about the design of the offense not doing the TE any favor.

The structure of Graham's contract has an "out" after the 2019 season, but if Gutekunst just pulls the plug and takes a loss he's essentially saying "I made a big mistake". For a variety of reasons, I don't believe he wants to send that message and I'd strongly suspect not only that Graham will be our starting TE in 2019, but that he'll have a better year than he did this year.

Lare's picture

I agree. It looks like the Packers can get some production out of Graham, at least he's someone opposing defenses have to account for. He may even be more effective in the new offensive scheme. If not, move on after next year.

I'd say to cut Perry and use the cap savings to re-sign Matthews for a year. They won't get much production out of Matthews but it'll more than they ever get out of Perry. It also gives Gutekunst another year to replenish the position.

Slim11's picture

We clearly know what we don’t have in Nick Perry. It’s time to release him. Perry is also part of the TT/MM mindset of drafting players and, purposely, playing them out of position (see Sherrod, Derek and Jones, Datone). They did him no favors.

Graham might benefit from the new offense. LaFluer WILL bring, at the least, an updated offense to Green Bay. To that end, he brought in Nate Hackett (whom I am cautiously optimistic about.) to help implement that offense. Is it an offense which can incorporate a TE productively? At the moment, this question helps Graham. Graham also played, or attempted to play, through his thumb injury.

Another factor is TE Bob Tonyan. Is he doing enough to merit a serious look by the new coaching staff? If yes, then keeping Graham might become a more pressing question.

Gort's picture

Old School, you probably didn't see this coming from me, but I agree with you. Perry needs to go. I was totally disappointed with Graham as our discussions have shown, but part of his problems may have been with how he was used. He does have a history of good seasons and may be worth another look.

carlos's picture

It seems player contracts and our offensive schemes, last year, have similar concepts.

Boulderbrewer's picture

I would get rid of both. The cap hit hurts, but keeping them takes up two roster spots that could be used for younger players.

Tingham's picture

I agree with this. One other point is that neither of these guys can/will ever play special teams. We need younger players that can contribute in ways other than one aspect and in Perry's case actually be available to play.

lebowski's picture

I remember when we drafted Perry in the first round, my thought was he'd better not be Datone Jones 2.0. Considering what we paid him he might be worse.

Coldworld's picture

But that is not the question here. The question is future contribution and cost thereof.

Old School's picture

Considering that Perry was taken in 2012, and Jones was taken in 2013, I don't understand what the hell was going on in your head when you thought Perry might be Datone Jones II.'

Perry was drafted in 2012, late in the first, which is where most draft boards and scouts predicted that he'd go. He was taken in direct response to the general feeling that we needed a "bookend" for Matthews. Two guys who were taken after him in the draft each have 0.5 more sacks...Akiem Hicks and Malik Jackson. Oliver Vernon, taken in the 3rd round, has quite a few more.

But that's it. Basically, Vernon is the only guy taken after Perry in that draft who has been a more productive pass rusher.

And everybody wants to release him. I sometimes wonder if we overvalue these OLB edge rushers. I think we do.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Perry just plain said he didn't want to be an OLB. Thompson drafted him anyway.

Razer's picture

Thanks Andy. Thanks for depressing the crap out of me.

Up front neither of these were good contracts or finds for the Packers. Both have under performed and health is always a factor. I was never a fan of the Perry draft nor his contribution to the defense since his rookie year. Graham was Gutekunst's initial splash and it was a bellyflop.

Having said that, I would keep them both for another year and let the new coaching staff try to get the value out of them. Clearly Mike McCarthy didn't know how to use a TE (or RB's for that matter). I think these new offensive minds will get more from the TE position and will get whatever Graham has left in the tank. We'll get the most of a poor signing.

As for Perry, let Pettine and the new assistants try to get an edge setting year out of him and allow the next generation time to get up to speed. With Matthews likely gone and rinse water like Fackrell and Gilbert left behind, we really don't have much choice. Consider another year of linebacker rebuild the cost of keeping Perry around.

Tingham's picture

But given Perry's injury history what is the likelihood he will be available to play. Small in my opinion.

Razer's picture

Maybe the biggest problem with Nick Perry overall is his availability rather than his contribution. Get some good games out of him and look for a trade or draft choice by mid season (depending on our depth). Either way, the contract has us getting something out of him or nothing and marginal savings. Ted and Russ Ball didn't put us in a good position on this one.

carlos's picture

I would play Perry, if I had to, in four man fronts on the edge with his hand on the dirt. Rotate and give him designs to things he likes and hope he can salvage his career somehow. Make int fun again.

Chris Vachio's picture

I'm torn. 100% in favor of cutting Perry and just biting the bullet. Maybe designate it as a post June 1 transaction to save a bit more against the cap. But even taking the full dead money, there's no reason we can't find someone to offer better production for the $3.3 million difference.

Graham, on the other hand, might be useful in a better offense. But most accounts, our offense was a terrible offense for tight ends under McCarthy. So he might be worth another year, but we've got to draft some young talent at the position to push him now and replace him later.

Big gar's picture

Did anyone ever think to renegotiate Rodgers contract. Patroits do it with Brady. Maybe we will see how much of a team player he is

tincada's picture

Why would he? He has no team around him this year or probably the next two. A coaching staff of huh?

Minniman's picture

It's funny you say that.

Part of me thinks that unless the Packers can reassemble a team around Rodgers in the next 1-2 years (with this years FA and Draft being lights out on obtaining productive talent and boding exceptionally well for year 2) do the Packers trade an AR that's still elite and reap the draft and cap capital to reload and rebuild........... much to the theme of this article....... take your "lumps" early and get on with it?

Side comment - Not that anyone is a certainty, but as someone who watches a fair amount of SEC college football I have been nothing but awestruck at what I saw Trevor Lawrence from Clemson achieve as a freshman.

Next year I'll be keenly watching both what this forthcoming year's FA and draft crop do, as well as what he and Ian Book from ND do in College.

...... pipe dream, but is it possible to 3-peat on successive HOF QB's for GB (..... yes Taryn, this year's GB Kool-Aid is an exceptional vintage!)

Old School's picture

When Gutekunst unnecessarily extended Rodgers contract, I think that was a pretty strong indication that the organization thinks we can get their with Rodgers.

Despite everything, this offense was above average in numerous areas. An improvement of 4 ppg on offense would put us in the Top 4. An improvement of 4 ppg on defense will put us in the Top 10.

The biggest need on offense is to strengthen the offensive line unit. The biggest need on defense, IMO, is to put 5 guys who can cover in the secondary.

Minniman's picture

Some really good points Old School (and my personal take too that the Packers could foreseeably ascend again with Rodgers and some strategic key pieces (duh! I know :) ).

I was taking the context of the article in saying that in a similar vein to what could happen to Perry and Graham, if the Packers continue to be spotty on FA, draft and retention then there's some very interesting high profile prospects coming through in the drafts and Rodgers' salary cap saving and draft pick asking price could enable that.

Tarynfor12's picture

" ...... pipe dream, but is it possible to 3-peat on successive HOF QB's for GB (..... yes Taryn, this year's GB Kool-Aid is an exceptional vintage!) "

Mentioned this very thing couple weeks ago, that in two years Lawrence comes out and GB should do whatever it needs to try and grab him. This isn't Kool-aid delusion but a real actual possible if the FO has the gonads to do it. He'd be able to sit behind Rodgers for two years and....Trifecta.

Bure9620's picture

Agree on Perry, he's a waste, even against the run now. I am wondering if may be worth keeping Graham, as we would not save much by cutting him, and also maybe Lefleur's offense can scheme Jimmy Graham open better.

Minniman's picture

If Perry gets cut, and he's injury-free then he'll probably be quite serviceable as a depth 2-down DE in a 4-3 D front - as what he can do is set an edge against the run game. What he can't (arguably couldn't) do was be a true QB sack monster.

With the new QB "force-field" rules I wonder whether the days of the beastly "crash through the tackle and decimate the QB" style of Edge rusher is gone - replaced by the 4.4-4.5 40 speed edge rusher to attack the throwing arm or wrap up the QB

freddisch's picture

Scheme doesn’t improve a players speed, ability to catch the ball or block

JimR_in_SoCal's picture

...nor his effort.

Swisch's picture

What happens if we invite both of these guys to training camp next year to see if they are energetic and effective?
If they're not, and we cut them in training camp, how much of their salaries do we have to pay (given that they get the guaranteed money in any case)?
With a new era in Green Bay, both of these guys may be motivated to really prepare themselves for a comeback.
LaFleur can talk with them right now and see if they truly want an extra opportunity. If they seem enthusiastic, perhaps it would be wise to at least bring them to training camp.
I'm hoping both of them are game for a revival of their careers with a resurgent Packers team.

PatrickGB's picture

Agree swisch

Community Guy's picture

i was wondering: do the same figures outlined above apply to post June 1 cuts??

Andy Herman's picture

It's a good idea but it doesn't work, unfortunately, because their roster bonus's kick in, in March. They need to make the decision prior to that time.

Rebecca's picture

Read the article.

Swisch's picture

So all of this gets back to my question of how much of their salaries do we have to pay these guys if we cut them in training camp.
This would include any payouts in March or June or any other time.
If the coaches and general manager think that Perry and Graham have the potential to contribute -- especially after talking with them -- then the payouts may be well worth the risk.
The numbers kind of confuse me, and I admittedly get impatient dealing with them -- so I'm appreciative of any fan who would make all of this clearer.
It may be well worth any payouts to give these guys another opportunity, I doubt they want to end their careers on the down note of last season.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

If GB waits until after March 14 to cut Perry, they have to pay him $4.8M on March 15. If they subsequently decide to cut Perry after TC, that $4.8M becomes additional dead money. Perry's total dead money goes from $11.1M to $15.9M.

If GB does a straight cut on 3-14, GB gains $3.337M in cap space to buy FAs. If they wait to cut Perry after march 14, they must pay the $4.8M roster bonus, so if cut after TC, the Packers would lose $1.463M in cap space. It is a $4.8M swing.

In other words, the price of admission to watch Perry play in Training Camp and/or Preseason games is $4.8M, a sum that GB can never get back unless he makes the team and plays well.

Tarynfor12's picture

There is absolutely no argument to justify keeping either of them...none.

No matter how many different ways keeping either or both is packaged, it will hurt this new culture,assumed, before it even begins on the field.
You do not continue to pay for shrinking ability. You cut your losses as quickly and painlessly as possible.

Never try and talk yourself into believing the product will somehow get better...a dead fish is a dead fish even if you put it back in the water...these two players are dead fish holding the pole...remove yourself from the hook and rid yourself of their stink.

Razer's picture

Not sure what you are saying here... :o)

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Clear to me!

JimR_in_SoCal's picture

It's Friday. Let's have a fish fry!

Rebecca's picture

lol

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I disagree as to the premise and as to one fact. As to Perry, if GB cuts Perry by March 14th, GB won't have to pay Perry one additional cent. There is no conceivable set of circumstances under which GB would pay cash to Perry NOT to play for GB. Perry's contract does not have any clauses in it under which he continues to collect money from GB if he is cut by March 14.

I agree that Perry has no trade value since he would come with his contract.

No team is going to pay Perry $11M in cash in 2019. There is no way in God's Green Earth that GB is going to let Perry play for the Packers under his current contract. Perry is going to accept a pay cut in 2019, it is just a question of whether he accepts the pay cut from GB or from some other team. It isn't a matter of whether it would be wise for Perry to accept a pay cut because he isn't going to have any choice.

Now, would it be wise for Perry to force GB to cut him (or pay him under the terms of his current contract)? That's a closer question. It depends. Will some team offer Perry a multi-year contract, one with some kind of signing bonus and noticeable pay? Desperate as teams are for pass rushers, I can't imagine a team offering Perry anything other than a small contract with an easy one-year out. A small multi-year contract would just lock Perry into playing for a lot less money for the rest of his career. He isn't going to get big up-front in a contract from another team. Or would Perry be wiser to sign a one-year prove-it deal and then hope to get an $8 or $10 million signing bonus in 2020?

Keeping Perry:

3 yrs: $42.837M cap ($31.737M cash to Perry)
2 yrs: $32.437M cap ($21.337M cash to Perry)
1 yrs: $21.837M cap ($10.737M cash to Perry)
0 yrs: $11.1M cap charge (Nada* in cash to Perry)

I expect that Perry would jump for joy if GB selected the 1, 2, or 3 yr options. Would Perry be happy if GB selected 0 yr option (which means release by March 14th)? He gets zero dollars in 2019 from GB. Perry would only earn in 2019 what some other team is willing to pay him. My guess is that's not much.

Accepting a Pay Cut to $3.5M from GB:
Yr 1: $7.2M Cap #; $7.237M cap savings
GB gets the value of Perry's play in 2019. Here come the jokes, but I think there is a reasonable chance that Perry's play in 2019 would have some value, perhaps $3.5M and that there is some chance that the value of his play might be worth $7.2M. If all 32 teams don't think Perry's play offers any value, then no team will offer him a contract. If GB doesn't like those chances, it could offer $1.5M or $2.5M instead of $3.5M I've suggested. If GB still doesn't like the odds, then Gute should just take the medicine and cut Perry.

To complete Andy's argument, if GB Perry still isn't worth it even with his pay cut, GB would take $14.6M in cap charges over 2019 and 2020, or $10.9M in cap charges over those two seasons and push $3.7M into 2021.

Old School's picture

Thought provoking, TGR. And of course, there is the uncomfortable truth that if we cut Perry and Matthews, then our OLB unit consists of Fackrell and Gilbert and not much else. And of course, IF he's on the field, Perry is a pretty solid player for us.

Rak47's picture

Sounds like all the Packers have to do is say take this pay cut by March 14th or we will release you, pay you nothing, and take the cap hit while you can pick up the vets minimum from another team or sit out and make no money. Sounds to me like that would really limit Perry's options while opening up a roster spot for a much younger, less expensive edge player. 0 year option seems to be the only one that makes sense.

Salvador Silva's picture

If he signs with someone else than it helps the packer's. That contract basically gets redone and that will automatically help the packers. Not a whole lot but it does

Rak47's picture

Perry's salary is on the books either way you look at it whether he's on the roster or not. Based on his injury history and production or lack thereof, however you wanna see it, I think it best to release him and not be burdened next year and the year after with his contract. Cut him, take the cap hit and replace him with a FA like Preston Smith, Za'Darius Smith or a couple of edge players in the draft. He will come completely off the books next year and hopefully they'll have two promising OLB from the draft to work with in his stead.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

No, Salvador, Graham signing with some other team doesn't help the Packers in the slightest (unless we traded him and got a draft pick for him). If we cut Graham, GB would have the same dead money and he wouldn't be part of the compensatory pick formula. [BTW, both OTC and Sportrac have the post-June 1 trade numbers wrong - off $5M so that's a lot.]

EDIT: even if Graham or Perry had offsets in their contract, that wouldn't help GB. Offsets only help if the money was originally guaranteed. Neither Graham or Perry have any guaranteed money left on their contract.

cheesehead1's picture

IMO, move on from both, plus Cobb who is also constantly injured. Never liked the Graham signing, slowing down, dropped passes and injuries.

Rak47's picture

If Gute resigns Cobb it will be for a fraction of what he made last year or he will most likely let him walk like he did Jordy.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

I told the Packers the sign Jimmy Graham like 4 years ago. this team is always a dollar late Penny short

tincada's picture

But but, they love undrafted rookies and tired worn out old FAs that are cheap. GB, the Wal Mart team of the NFL.

dobber's picture

Ugh...my brain.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

now Jimmy Graham is probably out of his Prime and this team does not know how to use tight ends

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

My god...."probably out of his prime?"

Graham is playing for one reason and one reason only. He is close but not a guaranteed Hall of Famer. From this perspective I do believe he will give close to 100% effort.

scullyitsme's picture

Another way to look at it is, would you keep graham for 5 mil this year? Perry at 3 million? That’s the reality. We are on the hook for the rest regardless. I could go either way but you could make a case that they are worth 5 and 3 million respectively.

Andy Herman's picture

The whole point of the article is showing that this is completely and 100% not the case, nor anywhere near reality.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

is out of his prime rather than probably. somebody better figure out how to use him in the red zone. that's the whole reason we got him!

Doug Niemczynski's picture

Packers better go draft TJ hockenson if they want a real tight end that can block catch he can do it all Red Zone threat it would only be a junior in college a six-foot-five 250 probably add another 10 lbs on a muscle this is a guy the Packers want need to be a packer for life

albert999's picture

Imagine if you had Hockenson and Fant
WOW

tincada's picture

This is your boy Murph the Surf's doing in the end. Or, I'm going to make Jerry Jones look smart. The BOD need to dump this clown. Another mediocre year coming up, but AR is smiling all the way to the bank.

fastmoving's picture

you already make Jerry Jones looking smart and Mark Murphy even smarter. But thats no big deal for you I guess…...

Doug Niemczynski's picture

More bio, uniform, draft, salary info
1x Pro Bowl
85
George Kittle TE
1x Pro Bowl
85
SUMMARY
2018
Rec
88
Yds
1377

TD
5

If the Packers want the same, then draft TJ Hockenson. If the Packers don't they will regret it FOREVER!!! Mark my words!

Doug Niemczynski's picture

If I was drafting that's probably what I would do!!

Two TE Set !!!!! All the way!!!

Holecrap's picture

Didnt read the article because neither of these guys can play football at the level needed to get to the playoffs so money is not an issue, cutting and replacing them is the only issue.
Why would you cough up money (Perry) for a guy who sits on the bench most of the time and when he does play, he takes a of plays off. He is useless, old and in effective.
Grahms best days were four years ago. Give it up, get someone who can run and play TE.

Bert's picture

Totally agree Ernie. This team needs to get better. You don't get better by hanging on to guys like Graham and Perry (and others) because of salary issues. If we stay the status quo as far as personnel then don't expect any better results in 2019.

byu.tech's picture

ted thompson after seattle championship was terrible. as mccarthy was. but...90% of packers fans thought they were great. i was one of the few saying murphy had to cut clean the house in 2014.
now people is wrtiting murphy waited to much to fire them...now. too easy

Salvador Silva's picture

Count me in also... I wanted the house cleaned after losing to Seattle

Qoojo's picture

I would wait till preseason and see how it all works out with Graham.

Perry is all about the injury history. I think it might be time to cut him lose and eat the cap hit. Supposedly, this draft is good for edge rushers, so see how that all plays out.

Either way, Packers have until the start of the season to make up their minds.

byu.tech's picture

the only way to get rid of graham and perry is to cut them after 1st june (i think 2 players can be cut). anyway i think graham could be really good in the new offense because mccarthy was bad to use TE. but perry is a too high risk

Bert's picture

Graham stinks. People have been saying for the last 5 years "he just isn't used right." No. He stinks and needs to find employment elsewhere.

albert999's picture

Draft ferrell and fant in 1st round
OL next 2 picks
5th pick Safety/Special teams

Doug Niemczynski's picture

I just think TJ Hockenson’s is better than Fant.

albert999's picture

Draft them both

alforno54's picture

Cutting these guys results in dead money. Since there are no guarantees whoever you get to replace them are going to be any better might as well keep them another year and hope for the best.

albert999's picture

Rodgers only has a few years left
Get the best possible people now no matter what
That’s why we’re paying McCarthy 9 million to sit home this year

Doug Niemczynski's picture

Well Graham is stuck on this team for another year...so the Packers better find a way to use him.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

The Packers have so many player needs at so many positions it is almost paralyzing! Gute is going to earn every penny this year. Which brings me back to why in God's green earth didn't they play some of the younger less experienced players those last 3 games? Why play Graham with a splint? Why wasnt Moore, Boyle, Tonyan, etc. playing extensively?

I truly believe things have been a major mess with Packers for sometime (I have been aware for numerous years but not nearly to the extent it has become apparent), and Rodgers has been able to hide and cover for the organization. Climbing out of this hole they have created (particularly the talent dearth) seems insurmountable at the moment, but as a true PF I will not give up. Even still feeling quite a bit of frustration with everything and wanting to desperately feel hopeful!

Needing good news!

byu.tech's picture

and for the people here writing rodgers is not as brady...a team player as brady ahahaah
in 2018 brady cap hit is higher than rodgers one.
in 2018 rodgers has the 14th cap hit among all NFL QBs.
people just talk to move the air...

LambeauPlain's picture

Cut Perry. He had a year under Pettine and he will tell ML that his best play is heading to IR.

Graham? He was the teams second most productive receiver. And he was very disappointed in his season.

Give him a chance with the new O staff and see if he can do better than Perry did with his.

CMIII? Gone.

Salvador Silva's picture

Clay mathews let him walk and just keep Perry to take over as fackrell's old spot. Backing up both edge rushers...

stockholder's picture

It's a coin flip. If you want to go to the super-bowl. You Keep them both. If you dump CM3, and Cobb. You keep them both. Do you want to see if it was MMs coaching? You keep them both. Do you want Rodgers to win another super-bowl? If your rebuilding, you dump them all. Who would they spend the money on, in Free Agency? It costs more every year. What insurance can they give you? The problem is can they stay healthy? No. What insurance will you get from all these rookies coming on the team. Roll the dice with CM3 and Graham? It depends on how the packers draft? We have a lot of holes. Bank the Cash and let them all go. Of these 4 guys. I believe only CM3 will be missed.

JimR_in_SoCal's picture

Some folks have been trying to make a case here for keeping Jimmy Graham for at least another season. Andy's shown us the financial implications.

The production this season from JG has been either good or bad, depending on who's posts you believe. I wanted to compare JG to who many of us would consider a good #3 WR, Geronimo Allison. I realize this might be less appropriate than a straight TE-TE comparison, but I wanted to see how much offense he provided to the Packers in 2018, vs. what an inexpensive, lower-tier skill position player like GMo might bring.

So, here are their 2018 stats:

JG:
16 games played
89 targets
55 catches (62% completions)
636 yards (11.6 yds/completion)
2 touchdowns

GMo:
5 games played
30 targets
20 catches (67% completions)
303 yards (15.2 yds/completion)
2 touchdowns
2018 salary/cap hit - $630K

It looks to me that GMo's more valuable to the team than JG.

Swisch's picture

Which gets me to thinking....
Allison seems tall enough for tight end, maybe a little light.
Then again, linebackers are getting smaller and faster, so maybe that could be the case for tight ends going forward -- especially on third down.
I don't know how well Allison blocks, but it seems the team is more in need of tight ends than wide receivers.
I always like to find a way to keep good guys on the team, even if it means a change of position.
As a rookie, Herb Adderley -- I know, I know, here I go again with the Lombardi era -- was switched from running back/flanker to cornerback due to a player injury at half time of a game against Detroit in 1961.
He had never played a down for the Packers on defense. Lombardi told him to just do his best. He had a key interception in a win, and went on to become a hall-of-famer at cornerback.
Lombardi would go on to admit that he almost made a huge mistake in not moving Adderley to his new position, and that he did so only under desperate circumstances.
By the way, Adderley would say that his years in Green Bay were the best of his life.

JimR_in_SoCal's picture

That's a great bit of Packers' lore, Swisch. Thanks for sharing it.

Salvador Silva's picture

If The offense is based on true west coast offense.. graham would help in a double te set. But not as the starter. I really believe the packer's need a real te to start. That te should be a good blocker and have pass catching ability. Graham's blocking is terrible. He should also be flexed out in goal line situation's for miss matches doing fade route.

Kevin Gibson's picture

This is excellent info and well presented. Appreciated.

Gort's picture

Andy, love everything you post. Thank you for the in depth analysis and for putting into a form that a dummy like me can understand. Keep up the great work.

Bert's picture

One big reason for Belichick's success is that he cuts his losses and moves on from bad contracts and underperforming players. Forget the 'dead money". Move on from underperforming players. Perry and Graham are underperforming players. Geeez. Upgrade the roster or lose! We need talent!

Jonathan Spader's picture

NE Dead $:

Cyrus Jones $278,491
Vincent Valentine $161,355
Malcolm Mitchell $144,498
TOTAL $688,033

Packer Dead $:

Vince Biegel $346,874
TOTAL $565,887

Try another Example Bert. this one failed. Part of BB's success is the opposite. It's signing on players that were failures with their previous teams and turning them into successes in NE's system. Aka the power of the hoodie.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I disagree. Belichick has never been afraid to shed players and take the cap hit. Dead money per Sportrac 2011 to 2018:
Belichick --- Thompson
$113.62M -- $53.51M
$14.2M/yr --$6.689M/yr

One might argue the details and causation. It might be that TT never cut guys and just let them play out their contracts, which avoids generating dead money, but doesn't make the team necessarily better. Over $7.5M of NE's dead money comes from cutting Aaron Hernandez. That's not a talent evaluation mistake, but NE drafted him despite character red flags.

Also, there are some methodology issues. For example, Sportrac listed GB as having $2.821M in dead money for HHCD because that's how much he earned in GB before we traded him. But that wasn't "dead" since he actually played nearly every snap during those 9 games for us. I think of dead money as money we spent on a player who ended up not playing for us (I don't care if he played well or badly). I suspect that NE was more prone to trading or cutting players mid-season, but I don't know NE well enough to go back and adjust for that.

I think the enormous difference just in raw numbers allays my concerns over methodology. I do believe that if Belichick thought Cobb was done back in March of 2018, he would have cut Cobb and taken the hit. I think Belichick would have little hesitation in cutting Perry now if he thought Perry was washed up. And Belichick on numerous occasions has played hardball with his players or screwed them over, like with making the late offer to Blount that made Blount eligible for the compensatory pick calculation.

albert999's picture

Apparently the team has settled on one of the early leaders. According to Matt Maiocco of NBC Sports, the Packers are hiring Adam Stenavich as their next offensive line coach. Stenavich was one of two individuals confirmed to have been interviewed, with former Bengals OL coach Frank Pollack being the other.

Salvador Silva's picture

Ok. What if these players were cut; than picked up by some other team? I don't know if Perry will get a look but I am sure someone would use Graham...
From what I hear this would workout for GB in the case of releasing them.

Jonathan Spader's picture

Saints would more than likely jump on Graham they are the reason the Packers overpaid. For Perry most likely Browns, Vikings, or NE. Vikings gave Jones a chance after he failed the Packers. Browns are the AFC Packers. NE is great at taking failed 1st rounders and using them properly.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos 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.

Or log in with Facebook

 
 
 

Quote

"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"