Packers are releasing Mike Daniels

[Mondio]

I'm guessing he's lost more than a step or 2 in their estimation from the injury and Looney and Kinglsey maybe showed some good stuff in OTA's. Though I imagine it's difficult to glean much of anything off a Dlineman in OTA's when they're doing nothing a DLineman is going to be asked to do for real.

Daniels strikes me as the guy that even if he knew he was being shopped he'd play just as hard to make the Packers keep him, or make someone else want him if he was physically able. I probably liked Daniels more than some here. Thought he was better than his ratings last year too, but I'm fine with the move. I think it all adds up to a pretty smart move actually. Of course if he comes on and is named an all pro, it will go down as a mistake, but all things considered I think we were likely looking down the barrel of paying an aging, injured big man too much money to do little more than hold a roster spot and decided to move on.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I fully expect the Packers to use the cap space saved by releasing Daniels on extending Clark.

With the cap cost of the 51 - 53 players currently under contract for 2020 sitting at $186 - $191 mil, (depending on which site you look at ) before the Lowry extention, perhaps going to $190 mil - $195 mil or more after booking Lowry, being habituated to Thompson-think it would stand to reason Clark is where the Daniels savings would go.

The NFLPA shows $7.6 mil in current cap space. This is a drop from the $9+ mil the last time I looked at it a few days ago, so it's fair to assume it reflects the 2019 prorated portion of Lowry's signing bonus. Daniels' cap savings should push it up to about $15 mil.

Here's the thing. This is no longer Thompson's salary cap management process. With the Packers new found willingness to backload contracts to the extreme that we saw this last offseason, they could do something like the following:

Clark is currently on the books for 2020 in that $190 - $195 mil range at an estimated 5th. year option cap and cash cost of somewhere between $7.7 mil (overthecap) and $9.5 mil (spotrac). Let's say that in place of that 5th. year option Clark is signed to a 4 year extension where his base salary is $1 mil for 2020 with a $40 mil signing bonus (cash money in Clark's pocket now) that is spread over 5 years for cap purposes. His 2020 cap cost would then be $9 mil, about the same as the 5th. year option.

The Packers would still be pushing the upper limit of the 2020 team cap number, but with the $15 mil still available for other uses between now and then. Gutekunst could do something similar with a Martinez, contract obvioulsy on a smaller scale, to defer the cap bite kicking in until 2021, just as the cap bite on the current crop of FAs doesn't kick in until 2020, and more in 2021.

Then we can look at possible cuts going for cap savings going into 2020 a la Daniels. Graham heads the list at $8 mil. Taylor sits at $4.6 mil of possible 2020 savings, with an extra $1 mil if he does not survive the roster cut down. So that would be an extra $15 mil added to the kitty for 2020.

This is the way many fans and some teams view the salary cap, not looking past a year or two. "Just backload 'em". But there is not free lunch. Sooner or late those cap deferals hit the books; to repeat the current crop of FAs hit in 2020 and more in 2021. So, how much more cap liability is the Packer brain trust willing to dump into 2021? How big a sell out to win in the 2019-2020 window are they willing to make?

If it is 2019-2020 or bust, then they can easily extend both Clark and Martinez.

 

[PackerDNA]

Are the cap numbers including the usual projected 10 million dollar increase?

 

[Dantés]

Daniels was a core player for most of his tenure with the Packers but his performance declined even before he suffered a season ending injury. I'm convinced he wouldn't have been a cornerstone player going forward.

No, his decline and all the moves made to replace his pass rush production all but guaranteed he was going to be a rotational player if he was retained.

 

[Wi. Mike now in Florida]

From the Packers web-site........


"In terms of financial flexibility, releasing Daniels saved the Packers roughly $8.3 million on the cap in 2019, freeing up money to spend both this season and in 2020."

 

[HardRightEdge]

Are the cap numbers including the usual projected 10 million dollar increase?

If you're referring to my post, the $190 - $195 mil cap currently committed to 2020 is just that, the cap hits for all of the contracts currently in place. The league salary cap for 2019 is about $188 mil, up about $11 mil from 2018. A cap number around $200 mil for 2020 is about as good a guess as any.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Your humility is a highly attractive trait. This is why I admire your posting.

Thanks.

 

[HardRightEdge]

From the Packers web-site........


"In terms of financial flexibility, releasing Daniels saved the Packers roughly $8.3 million on the cap in 2019, freeing up money to spend both this season and in 2020."

That's a nice and better than expected figure.

Yesterday, before overthecap moved Daniels from under contract to the dead money list, they showed him as having a $7.1 mil in salary and $500,000 in per game bonuses, indicating $7.6 mil in savings. Now, they show those figures as $6.6 mil + $500,000.

It all comes out in the wash once the NFLPA updates the web site which might take a few days.

 

[XPack]

Gutekunst even suggested the defensive front will look different in 2019, not just personnel-wise but also scheme-wise.

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/20...ains-reasoning-for-releasing-dl-mike-daniels/

Now what does this refer to?

 

[HardRightEdge]

This is water under the bridge, and qualifies as impugning the dead, but there is another possible factor in the Daniels release that's been nagging at me. I'll put it out there for consideration.

Around the end of the 2017 season, there was report quoting an unnamed inside source that the Packer coaches were not happy with Daniels' undisciplined play that season. Finding that story now looks be a needle in the google algorithm's haystack. Too much freelancing was the nub of it. Now, that was the Capers regime with him and most of his assistants gone in 2018. One guy seeing a lack of discipline could be aggressiveness in the eyes of the next guy.

But it is worth considering whether Pettine might have shared that opinion. It is possible that the widely discussed "accountability" issues might have extended to Daniels. Or looked at another way, it might be the kind of thing you tolerate if the impact plays are frequent enough, but not so much once performance shows decline with a season ending injury piled on top.

 

[gbgary]

No, his decline and all the moves made to replace his pass rush production all but guaranteed he was going to be a rotational player if he was retained.

everyone on the Packers d-line are rotational guys. pff has ranked the 2019 Packers run defense in the bottom half of the league. they're a worse team without him. i understand the reason they let him go though...cap room. there isn't a football reason to let him go.

 

[Dantés]

everyone on the Packers d-line are rotational guys. pff has ranked the 2019 Packers run defense in the bottom half of the league. their a worse team without him. i understand the reason they let him go though...cap room. there isn't a football reason to let him go.

Yes, that's right. All DL rotate. What I meant is that Daniels role projected to decrease from that of a starter who plays ~60% and gets relieved at times to that of one of the guys coming in as said relief.

This decreasing role and decreasing effectiveness made for his release.

I agree with you though that in a vacuum he would still have been a value to keep on the team.

 

[PackAttack12]

everyone on the Packers d-line are rotational guys. pff has ranked the 2019 Packers run defense in the bottom half of the league. their a worse team without him. i understand the reason they let him go though...cap room. there isn't a football reason to let him go.

Well yeah from a football standpoint I'm sure the Packers would love to be able to have an endless supply of money, along with being able to spend over the cap on 53 pro bowlers. But that isn't the reality of the NFL. No deal in the NFL is strictly a football deal. Money is always taken into consideration.

Doesn't mean that the Packers are "punting" on the season. That statement is short sighted, and quite premature.

 

[Dantés]

It's somewhat telling that no one was willing to spend any draft capital on a trade for Daniels. That's a strong indication that the league's opinion of him is pretty far from fan perception.

 

[gbgary]

It's somewhat telling that no one was willing to spend any draft capital on a trade for Daniels. That's a strong indication that the league's opinion of him is pretty far from fan perception.

why give up something when you know he's about to be released?

 

[gbgary]

Yes, that's right. All DL rotate. What I meant is that Daniels role projected to decrease from that of a starter who plays ~60% and gets relieved at times to that of one of the guys coming in as said relief.

This decreasing role and decreasing effectiveness made for his release.

I agree with you though that in a vacuum he would still have been a value to keep on the team.

but he would have been a starter (unless someone in preseason outplayed him...which is unlikely). he's the 2nd best DT on the team. no one below him in the depth chart was going to take his job. they're biting a bullet for the cap's sake.

 

[gbgary]

Well yeah from a football standpoint I'm sure the Packers would love to be able to have an endless supply of money, along with being able to spend over the cap on 53 pro bowlers. But that isn't the reality of the NFL. No deal in the NFL is strictly a football deal. Money is always taken into consideration.

Doesn't mean that the Packers are "punting" on the season. That statement is short sighted, and quite premature.

sure but "money" is a cap standpoint...not a football standpoint. from a football standpoint there's no reason to release him. he was the 2nd best DT on the team. a team that is now weaker up the middle...which was an issue in itself.

 

[Dantés]

why give up something when you know he's about to be released?

To ensure that you're the one who ends up with him.

 

[Dantés]

but he would have been a starter (unless someone in preseason outplayed him...which is unlikely). he's the 2nd best DT on the team. no one below him in the depth chart was going to take his job. they're biting a bullet for the cap's sake.

Based on last year, I think Lowry and Smith would have played ahead of him as interior players this season. Lowry is better than him at this point in their careers and Smith is a superior interior pass rusher.

 

[gbgary]

To ensure that you're the one who ends up with him.

but in a trade you've given up draft capital and you're on the hook for that last year in his contract. that's too much for a one year rental. no?

 

[Dantés]

but in a trade you've given up draft capital and you're on the hook for that last year in his contract. that's too much for a one year rental. no?

But if the league viewed Daniels as being as valuable as Packer fans perceive, then a late round pick for a one year rental would be worth it. He's only likely to get one or two years from a team as a FA anyhow.

 

[gbgary]

But if the league viewed Daniels as being as valuable as Packer fans perceive, then a late round pick for a one year rental would be worth it. He's only likely to get one or two years from a team as a FA anyhow.

based on this forum i don't think Packers fans believe he IS valuable. he was a probowler in 17. the 2nd best dt on the team. as for a trade, again it's that last year of the contract that's the killer for a cap-strapped team...as it was for the Packers. he'll be much cheaper now as a free agent.

 

[Dantés]

based on this forum i don't think Packers fans believe he IS valuable. he was a probowler in 17. the 2nd best dt on the team. as for a trade, again it's that last year of the contract that's the killer for a cap-strapped team...as it was for the Packers. he'll be much cheaper now as a free agent.

So you basically agree that his value was outstripped by his cap hit?

 

[Mondio]

He "was" the 2nd best DT. I was fine keeping him, i'm not completely surprised at his release. I have no idea what he's like post injury. I'm guessing not the same.

 

[Sanguine camper]

It's somewhat telling that no one was willing to spend any draft capital on a trade for Daniels. That's a strong indication that the league's opinion of him is pretty far from fan perception.

I think the failure to trade Daniels is that most teams don't have much cap space this close to the beginning of training camp. If he would wait until teams get desperate because of injuries later in training camp, Gute could've made a deal. Cutting Daniels now was a kneejerk reaction.