Parsons?

[Sparkey]

Difference makers. There are few and even fewer that are 26 years old and are available. This is a GREAT MOVE.

Two ways to improve the secondary: Better CB's or better pass rush. The first only affects one side of the field, the second affects both.

No brainer for me.

[Teamcheez1]

Kenny Clark 2024 season:

Overall PFF Grade & Context

Overall Grade: 59.3, placing him at the 85th percentile among 219 interior defenders PFF+13PFF+13SI+13.
Pass Rush Grade: 63.1 (72nd out of 219 interior defenders) PFF.
Run Defense Grade: 57.1 (83rd of 219 interior defenders) PFF+11PFF+11FTN Fantasy+11.

These figures indicate Clark delivered roughly average overall performance, with slightly above-average pass-rushing and slightly below-average run defense.

Now, he supposedly played injured, so these numbers could improve.

[Bretsky]

I've read/heard that the Packers offered two #1s, a #2, and a "talented defensive player" for Parsons. And of course, Parsons would get ridiculously big money. Is this a good idea - if in fact it is true at all, not fake news?

My first take on this is that if Jerry Jones doesn't think Parsons is worth that much, then the Packers should back off such a deal. Parsons is good, for sure, but THAT good? I sorta doubt it.

If we could get him cheaper, though, then maybe.

We actually gave up more, and I'm cool with it. What you have to remember, Tex, is JJ is a shit GM

[Bretsky]

There's NOT gonna be a Parsons trade to the Packers, probably not to anybody.

Bobblehead got it right that the Packers don't really need Edge Rusher help, that's part of it. The main thing, though, is that Jerry Jones is gonna find a way to retain him. This is mostly a lot of media puke generated bullshit.

DAM MEDIA PUKES....RIGHT AGAIN ))))

[Bretsky]

Great move by somebody who I never thought would have the stones to do it

[Bretsky]

WHERE IS JUSTIN HARRELL ANYWAYS ? Is the due in jail or something ?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Maybe a little of both. Optimist that I am, I'm starting to rev up my optimism about this.

Two first rounders and Kenny Clark? My first thought was APB is gonna be happy hahahaha. I'm sorta glad too that a kinda aging Clark went instead of Gary or Van Ness. Two first round picks that certainly ought to be near the very bottom of the first round? I don't know. It sounds like a lot, but considering who we have drafted in the first round recently (not counting Golden), I guess it's ok. But Parsons damn well better not get hurt.

As for who got over on who? I think it was a fairly fair trade. Jerry Jones got more than most people thought he would, but if Parsons plays up to expectations, this makes the Packers easily the best teamin the NFL. I thought Parsons was a little bit overworked with the Cowboys. With the plethora of excellent edge rushers the Packers have, he can be rotated a little bit more as well as not being concentrated on so much by opponents.

So I will guardedly give my approval to the deal.

Two, most likely, late 1sts and an overpaid Cletitus Clark for a bona fide sackmaster is a great trade.

Mark your calendar: Packerrats meetup game. Super Bowl week. Madtown’s place. Packers-Lunmpensteelers.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

WHERE IS JUSTIN HARRELL ANYWAYS ? Is the due in jail or something ?

I am wondering about the same thing.

[Teamcheez1]

Two questions:
1. We paid Parsons $47M, however we now remove Clark from the books. What is the savings from losing Clark per year?
2. What is our alignment/rotation going to look like in the middle? Other teams pundits claim we will no longer be capable of stopping the run without Clark.

[Joemailman]

Two questions:
1. We paid Parsons $47M, however we now remove Clark from the books. What is the savings from losing Clark per year?
2. What is our alignment/rotation going to look like in the middle? Other teams pundits claim we will no longer be capable of stopping the run without Clark.

Ken - Packers Cap
@KenIngalls

The net cap cost of trading Kenny Clark and acquiring Micah Parsons at this 5th year option is ($21.7m).

Parsons will sign his new mega-deal and get his cap number lower after the trade goes through to give the Packers some breathing room.

[bobblehead]

The final numbers are going to funky. Parsons will play this year on the 5th year option (I've seen a few numbers. $24M being highest.). If we signed him to a 4 year, its really a 3 year with team option....I need to see what that number is. If the cap continues to go up (it will) this might simply be a market contract given the cheap year this year. I'm betting 5th year is $50M+ which makes this look more like 4 years for $164M. That seems much more tolerable to me. Unlikely he ever plays that 5th year at the contract cost.

[Fritz]

Best comment I've heard so far: "Packers gave up more picks for John Hadl."

To me, hands down, that was one of the worst trades in NFL history - close to the Herschel Walker trade or the Ricky Williams trade. I mean, worse if you were the team trading for those guys.

These are my thoughts on the Parsons trade:

- As others have said, this will impact who will not be in Green Bay next year. Quay Walker won't be getting an extension now. Nor will Sean Rhyan or Rasheed Walker. Nor will Watson or Doubs. These names have been mentioned in this thread and others. But I would add Rashan Gary to the list. He won't be back next year - they won't be able to afford to keep that contract, and LVN will be waiting in the wings (we hope - if he has a good year). I wonder if a Devonte Wyatt extension will be out of the question now, too.

- I do think Rashan Gary will have a good year - if everyone's healthy, how can he not? Less double-teaming, more opportunities for sacks. Given that the team won't be able to afford him AND Parsons next year, could the team actually trade Gary next offseason? I don't knolw enough about contracts to know if that's viable, but if it is, that would help the team recoup some of that lost draft capital.

- The entire model for the team has changed - now, as Patler has said elsewhere, you've got to find first-contract (i.e., cheap) talent to fill in because you have two players (Love and Parsons) taking up a third of the cap space. and you just gave away your best chance to do that by giving away two first-round picks. That's going to put even more pressure on the college scouting department to find real talent with fewer picks (remember, they also gave up a sixth for that offensive lineman a week ago) - and fewer high-level picks. I'm not sanguine about this new model.

- Yes, Clark would likely have been gone next year anyway. True. However, he was here this year, and now you've left yourself a hole in the middle of the defense. The run defense especially. Your replacements are either a converted 3-technique who never showed much anyway, or a late-round rookie draft pick who has some pass rush potential but may or may not be able to stop the run, or an undrafted free agent who had only mixed success in preseason as a run stopper. And now I wonder if Guter kept so many DT's in his original 53 (a surprise I noted elsewhere) because this trade has been in the works for a while.

- As Bobble has pointed out, Parsons is a Clay Matthews bend-around-the-edge type, which has, as one consequence, the result that there will be holes for mobile QB's like, say, Jayden Daniels, to run through.

- The pressure's on Halfley, but maybe even moreso on The Flower. On Halfley because the defense needs to be better than last year - he's been given an All Pro pass rusher. But even moreso, what if Halfley figures out how to integrate Parsons into this defense, and he puts out a really good defense by mid-year on? Then it's on the offense to show up, and if it doesn't, then that makes The Flower look bad. He needs Jordan Love and Co. to have a good year - a lot better than last year, that's for sure.

- You do win in the NFL with stars. And the Packers got a star - but it's going to cost them. It's a big risk. You're risking the future of the franchise, and you're gambling that your big pieces are going to stay healthy. Especially starting next year, when the depth and talent level at other positions will be dependent on the college scouting department finding gems in rounds two through seven, with fewer picks.

Yikes. I'm nervous about this one. This dude better produce and he'd better stay healthy. I wouldn't put him on the field for game one - they need to get him in football shape. You can't afford an injury because he hasn't had training camp.

[bobblehead]

Take everything you wrote about the cap and then knock off about 30% of the negative effect. The cap will go up, contracts will get modified and we won't lose quite everyone you mention. But it is fair to say that in addition to what we traded we will lose at least one more good player we would rather keep as a consequence of this.

Pretty sure Rhyan and Walker were gone anyway. If Gary plays decent he isn't going anywhere. We may be able to bring Watson back on a prove it deal depending. Walker....wasn't happy about them planning to resign him. They should have converted him to edge long ago as I pointed out many times his skill set resembles Parsons and his instincts off the ball are....not great.

One thesis I have rejected FOREVER is that you win with stars. You win by not having gaping deficiencies like we have at CB right now. But I'm a front 7 kind of guy and if the "big 3" stays healthy they will be enough...but one injury and oof!! When you field 11 solid players it makes some guys look like starts who are just above average. But I'll also concede that fielding a star also makes above average players look like stars.

[George Cumby]

From the Packers subreddit:

"While it’s been widely claimed that Dallas offered Micah $40.5m/aav (as opposed to the Packers at $47m), this is sleight of hand. Agents leak details to reporters that give them the headline numbers they want, as it’s good for their client and helps their brand image with other players. While many fans might find Micah worth either amount, the good news for cheeseheads is we’re paying less.

Dallas reportedly offered $202.5m/5, which was a four year extension combined with his 5th year option ($24m for 2025). Crucially though, the Packers inherit this option, making his true AAV just $42.4m ($24m + $188m extension, divided by 5). The headlines are just ignoring the option as part of the deal.

It also gets better than that:

The Packers will get $43.8m back on the remainder of Clark’s contract (still ~$35m dead money spread across 2025 and 2026, but Dallas takes on $43.8m in salary and bonuses).
Assuming the Packers would have picked around 25th for both of the 2026 and 2027 drafts, those two first round picks would have made a combined ~$29m across the length of Micah’s contract. Those roster spots will now go to cheaper players.
While ofc this all assumes that Micah will remain healthy and effective, and while the value of those lost picks is unknowable, on a cash and cap basis the Packers got a very good deal. Micah will cost a bit under 14.5% of the cap for his first three years (2025-2027), after which he’ll presumably want a new contract. This is slightly cheaper than eg Nick Bosa’s last contract on a % of cap basis. Were we to sign an elite edge in 2026 using inflated dollars we would certainly pay more than $42.4m/aav. And in some dark scenario where Micah doesn’t perform this year the Packers can effectively cut their losses by the end of 2027, as they’ve only guaranteed $120m at signing, or roughly his $24m 2025 option plus two years at $47m.

(There’s also a standing dispute about whether his 2025 option will be $24m or ~$21m. The Cowboys tried to pay him as a DE instead of an LB. While it’s presently unclear how the Packers settled this, the Cowboys’ stated 2025 cap savings imply they counted it based on the lower number. It’s certainly possible that Micah waived this dispute in return for a better headline AAV for the extension. If so, the Packers are only paying him $7m more total over the life of his contract vs. the reported Dallas offer. And of course Micah didn’t sign said offer. So we may have paid no premium at all.)

Gutey and Russ Ball masterclass imo."

[Fritz]

Well, as I texted a friend, I'm unsure about this move, though your posts make me feel like maybe it's not quite as drastic as it seems, financially. But still, giving up two first-round picks changes your model of talent acquisition going forward.

This tidbit just occured to me - While the Packers, before this move, were already the youngest team in the league (https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/g...eam-in-the-nfl), this move just made them even younger. They traded a soon-to-be 30 year old for a 26 year old.