Official Packers Offseason/Free Agency Thread

[King Friday]

The cap can always be defeated by smart accounting practices i.e. cooked.

This is just a flat out lie, Tex. The entire purpose of the cap is to force a limitation on teams in terms of what they can spend. While teams can certainly use techniques to push money out, and benefit from periods where increasing revenues work to push the cap higher, it is impossible to ALWAYS defeat it.

The fact the Packers are losing players is precisely because of the cap. I'm sure the Packers would've preferred to keep several of the guys who moved on...but they choose not to pay higher contractual amounts PRECISELY because of the cap. That is the ONLY reason those guys are no longer in Green Bay.

So, you can't ALWAYS cook the cap and get what you want.

[texaspackerbacker]

When I say "smart accounting practices i.e. cap-cooking" I just worded it that way to annoy ya'all negativists (is that what they call trolling?). What I mean is perpetually doing exactly what we have been doing - big bonuses, long term contracts, tiny first year salary/cap hit, back loaded probably with void years at the end. And then when it's time to pay the piper, you do it all over again. Sure, in 3 or 5 or 7 or 10 years when Rodgers actually retires and maybe a similar or lesser situation with other guys contracts at some point in the future, we might have a period of badness - or not with the expected increase in the cap, but we postpone that as long as possible and have continued great success as long as we have Rodgers. Thankfully, LaFleur, Gutekunst, et al seem to think that way too.

[bobblehead]

Any or all of the above could have been back in the Packers wanted them back, though. This post is disingenuous at best. One could argue they were overpaid and not worth the money and the assets they will get in exchange for them exceeds their contributions at their costs.

Agreed. If the packers wanted to pay MVS $10 mil and D 28 Mil and Turner whatever he got, we could have destroyed the cap for 4 years instead of 2. Or alternatively we could have started the lineup from the movie major league for 2 years.

I ask you then, if the cap could be cooked and we could have brought them all back, and Rodgers wanted MVS back, and I would think we wanted our starting RT back, probably a solid CB as well.....why didn't we? Is Gutes just stupid and TRYING to lose?

[bobblehead]

We do not have nor can we create enough space to keep everyone. Choices had to be made. They made as much space as they could and kept as many as they could.

No JH, we are just stupid. They could have brought everyone back, and signed 3 premium FAs, but Gutes doesn't really want to win or something.

[bobblehead]

We did, we do, and we could have - at least everyone except maybe Z. Smith. Davante would have been affordable either with the franchise tag or on a contract like he signed with Oakland (oops). MVS could have been re-signed for about what KC is paying, but I guess the Packers decided he wasn't worth that much. This offseason is far from over, but IMO, we could win and be near the top even with no help other than what we get in the draft, but I'm fairly sure we sign either Fuller or D. Smith or maybe J. Jones, maybe even land Metcalf or some other big fish.

See, tex says so. No wonder ARod is pissed. Gutes is sabotaging him by not bringing in 53 pro bowlers to crush the Owl.

[RashanGary]

No JH, we are just stupid. They could have brought everyone back, and signed 3 premium FAs, but Gutes doesn't really want to win or something.

That is just it. If the cap can be cooked, why not cook it and keep your team together? Why let so many go?

[run pMc]

The cap can be manipulated, but there are limits. The Packers are just about at that limit. There simply aren't any sizable contracts left to cook for 2022 with the exception of an extension for Jaire or Amos.
When you push or stretch money out over years - even void years - it doesn't go away, it grows into a pile of future cap space.
Check this out: https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay-packers/cap/2022/
They actually have about $24M in dead cap money for 2022 - money that could have been used to sign other players. Kevin freaking King isn't suiting up for GB but he'll count $3M+ against the cap this year.

It makes sense to keep Rodgers and keep trying for an Owl as long as it looks possible, and I think we all agree that at some point it's going to be very ugly because the dead cap numbers are going to grow. (Yes, the cap will also, but I don't think the growth of the cap is going to keep pace...especially with Rodgers contract if he retires in 2 years.) Claiming the cap can be indefinitely cooked is not true.

As for additional off-season moves, I'd consider offering the comp R4 or an R5 for Davante Parker... he's at best the #3 on the depth chart behind Tyreek and Waddle, he has two years on his contract that are about what MVS got, and he's a better WR. They will need to get a veteran WR of at least reasonable quality, asking Cobb, Lazard, and Amari Rodgers to be your top 3 WRs is a stretch. (And yes, I'm assuming they will draft a WR or two, but history shows it is unusual for rookie WRs to be superstars out of the gate.)

I don't know about Julio Jones, I feel like dude is always hurt and he's like 33 now.

Will Fuller is either secretly good, on steroids, or hurt. I don't think you can count on him for more than 8-10 games a season - he's hurt more than Kevin King.

If you are active in Free Agency, you are most likely paying at-or-above market rates for players who might be reaching the downside of their careers. (i.e., you're probably overpaying) Ascending players tend to be kept by their teams, Davante and Tyreek notwithstanding. GB made this mess by either not drafting WRs, or not drafting good ones.

[texaspackerbacker]

See, tex says so. No wonder ARod is pissed. Gutes is sabotaging him by not bringing in 53 pro bowlers to crush the Owl.

The off-season ain't over yet.

[RashanGary]

The off-season ain't over yet.

Why not cook the cap more and keep guys like Davante, Zadarius and MVS?

[NewsBruin]

To pile onto pMc"s point, re-working contracts to "cook the cap" also makes players trade-proof and cut-proof until the last year of their deal. Maybe someone like Jaire is a no-brainer to keep, but if any of our "cooked" players is permanently injured or becomes a lockerroom liability, the team's already written the check and the cap hit comes due once he's off the roster.

It's great if you're the trading partner: The offering team is eating the bonus part of the cap hit, so you're paying below-market and you have much less cap penalty if you want to cut him during his contract.

[texaspackerbacker]

Why not cook the cap more and keep guys like Davante, Zadarius and MVS?

How many times does it need to be said, Davante wanted to go, Zadarius is a bad investment with that back problem, and MVS was deemed to be not worth the money (I wish they had kept him, but apparently the people running the team don't have as good an opinion of him as I do). None of that was about cap problems.

The Raiders will regret paying Davante' The Vikings will strongly regret paying Zadarius; And the Chiefs will be glad they paid Valdez-Scantling.

[Bretsky]

I don't think anybody said Zadarius is a bad investment. With no cap, I'd keep him in a second as he's a great pass rusher. We've got plenty of reserves in GB is we're not considering the cap.

If he's healthy Minnesota got a deal for his talents. But with a salary cap, we had to let him go.

[bobblehead]

I don't think anybody said Zadarius is a bad investment. With no cap, I'd keep him in a second as he's a great pass rusher. We've got plenty of reserves in GB is we're not considering the cap.

If he's healthy Minnesota got a deal for his talents. But with a salary cap, we had to let him go.

Haven't you been paying attention? We did NOT have to let him go, we chose to.

[Upnorth]

If I didnnt have to worry about cap room I would definitely have z and mvs. Plus I would actively be lookiing at available dt and ot right now. Plus I would get Julio and fuller and Landry. Because why not? We have top 10 cash flow. Stupid to not get these guys.

Also the Raiders niners and patriots have the 3 highest ticket revenues so they should have the best free agents becausecap doesn't matter.
Or dallas and the giants.

But that's not how it really works.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

I don't think anybody said Zadarius is a bad investment. With no cap, I'd keep him in a second as he's a great pass rusher. We've got plenty of reserves in GB is we're not considering the cap.

If he's healthy Minnesota got a deal for his talents. But with a salary cap, we had to let him go.

I