2019 Cap Space

[Jerellh528]

My point is that you do not have to compare Graham's performance and pay to Nelson's in order to question Graham's value proposition. The presention, with the average pay noted, suggests an either/or proposition as in, "look, we could have gotten more production with Nelson for less money."

My point is that's a flawed way to look at it. Neither is a good value proposition, they play different positions, and retaining Nelson would have delayed MVS's development while MVS has been similarly productive if in different ways.

At this juncture, the only relevant question is this:

Will Jimmy Graham be a $5.3 million TE in 2019? That's the cap savings if he is cut. That is certainly debateable.

And if you want to compare these players' pay, average pay is not the way to look at it. If Graham is cut, his cap cost for this one season of play will have been $13.2 mil, $5.9 mil this year and $7.3 mil in dead cap next year. Nelson has no dead cap because he did not get a signing bonus or guarantees for 2019. If released, his cap cost for this one season of play will be limited to this year's $7.4mil.

You don’t have to compare graham to Nelson, but it’s interesting to look at. You don’t have to do anything in this forum, but we’re all here to talk about different things. If a new wrinkle of comparison is brought up then post or not, but it’s pretty lame just to claim it’s irrelevant. If that’s what you think then just pass by the post without unnecessary comments.

 

[HardRightEdge]

You don’t have to compare graham to Nelson, but it’s interesting to look at. You don’t have to do anything in this forum, but we’re all here to talk about different things. If a new wrinkle of comparison is brought up then post or not, but it’s pretty lame just to claim it’s irrelevant. If that’s what you think then just pass by the post without unnecessary comments.

 

[rodell330]

Cut Perry and Bring back Matthews on a 1
Yr deal with that 3.5 they’ll save by cutting Perry. If not? then you can use that 3 mil to bring back Geronimo on a 1 yr prove it deal. Depends which one you need more. I’d cut Graham just because I believe that at this point Tonyan is probably the better player and Graham doesn’t look like he will give us anything more that what he has.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It's probably a good time to make the donuts again:

Cap committments for the current top 53 players + current dead cap: $163 - $164 mil depending whether you prefer overthecap or spotrac; lets call it $163.5 mil
Cap carryover from NFLPA: $7.9 mil
Estimated 2019 league cap: announced as in the range $187 - $191.1 mil; lets call it the midpoint at $189.0 mil

Current top 53 cap space = $33.4 mil before subtractions

Spotrac shows an estimated draft pool cap of $10.26 mil; overthecap is at $10.35 mil for the 10 picks using this chart [https://overthecap.com/draft/]; lets call in $10.3 mil. Assuming these 10 players replace the lowest cap players among the top 53 (10 x $495,000 = $5.0 mil with no dead cap), the net 2019 cap cost of the draft class comes to $5.3 mil.

Current top 43 + 10 draftess leaves $28.1 mil cap space before additional subtractions

Last season's practice squad salary was $129,200 per slot. Assuming a 7% bump in line with the salary cap bump, the 2019 estimated cap cost for the PS is $138,000 x 10 players = $1.4 mil.

Current top 43 + 10 draftees + PS leaves $26.7 mil cap space before additional subtractions

Something needs to be held in reserve for PUP/IR replacements. $3 mil is a reasonable number.

Current top 43 + 10 draftees + PS + PUP/IR replacments leaves $23.7 mil cap space after subtractions

That $23.7 mil cap space is your current working number for free agency. That number could go up with certain cuts, with the following players yielding the indicated cap savings:

• Perry: $3.33 mil if cut by March 14
• T. Williams: $4.8 mil if cut by March 14 (in contract year)
• Bulaga: $6.8 mil (in contract year)
• Crosby: $3.6 mil (in contract year)
• Graham: $5.3 mil if cut by March 14
• Daniels: $8.3 mil (in contract year)

I doubt we'll have any further clarity until early March. The team cap number and rookie scale were set on March 5 last season. Then it's fast and furious. Or not.

 

[HardRightEdge]

So, lets revist where we would be if the Packers had dealt for Mack on similar terms as the Bears using that $23.7 in usable FA cap space as illustrated in the above post.

Mack's cap number was $13.8 mil for 2018 and $22.3 mil for 2019. Those numbers alone put you $12.4 mil over the usable 2019 cap before the following adjustments.

Mack's 2018 number would have put the team over the cap at that time. The most plausible solution to get under the cap would have been to cut Matthews to pick up $11 mil in cap space. Had that been done, we'd now be standing at $1.4 mil over the usable FA cap space.

Further, the two first rounders this year are roughly equivalent to what the Bears gave up. So, if you're not signing those guys because you traded them you gain about $3.8 mil in cap if you swap out those guys for the next two guys below the top 53. That gets you to $2.4 mil in usable FA cap. Cut Perry and you get to $5.7 mil for FAs.

So, that leaves you with the current roster plus Mack, very little for FAs whether you cut Perry or not, and you've lost your two first round picks. Cut more of those guys in the list in the above post and you add some dough to the usable cap space.

Boil it down, and you would have traded two first round picks and surrendered $25 mil in cap space, i.e., 2 or 3 quality free agent signings now. One HOF Edge rusher for 4 or 5 players to rebuild the roster.

See why that would have been a terrible trade? And why I concluded from the get go that Gutekunst never got very far with that? You have to look past "win now" when you don't have a loaded roster with a bunch of rookie contract stars to begin with.

With the Bears making that deal and coming up short, they are cap strapped and will be losing a player or two they'd rather not with no first round pick this year or next to reload.

No player other than a QB is worth this kind of money especially when giving up those kinds of picks.

 

[OldSchool101]

I said after that missed double doink this playoffs that the Bears are on an uphill climb. They pick just once this draft at (#87 overall) inside of the first 2 days of drafting. Meanwhile we pick 6 selections before their #119 pick.


GB is about to get an injection of talent between a couple of solid FA picks, the current draft capital in 2019 (partly heldover draft cap from 2018) and finally a relatively young team gaining some much needed seasoning.

I predict GB will improve by 3+ wins in 2019 and the Bears will regress into the 9-10 wins area

 

[Mondio]

So, lets revist where we would be if the Packers had dealt for Mack on similar terms as the Bears using that $23.7 in usable FA cap space as illustrated in the above post.

Mack's cap number was $13.8 mil for 2018 and $22.3 mil for 2019. Those numbers alone put you $12.4 mil over the usable 2019 cap before the following adjustments.

Mack's 2018 number would have put the team over the cap at that time. The most plausible solution to get under the cap would have been to cut Matthews to pick up $11 mil in cap space. Had that been done, we'd now be standing at $1.4 mil over the usable FA cap space.

Further, the two first rounders this year are roughly equivalent to what the Bears gave up. So, if you're not signing those guys because you traded them you gain about $3.8 mil in cap if you swap out those guys for the next two guys below the top 53. That gets you to $2.4 mil in usable FA cap. Cut Perry and you get to $5.7 mil for FAs.

So, that leaves you with the current roster plus Mack, very little for FAs whether you cut Perry or not, and you've lost your two first round picks. Cut more of those guys in the list in the above post and you add some dough to the usable cap space.

Boil it down, and you would have traded two first round picks and surrendered $25 mil in cap space, i.e., 2 or 3 quality free agent signings now. One HOF Edge rusher for 4 or 5 players to rebuild the roster.

See why that would have been a terrible trade? And why I concluded from the get go that Gutekunst never got very far with that? You have to look past "win now" when you don't have a loaded roster with a bunch of rookie contract stars to begin with.

With the Bears making that deal and coming up short, they are cap strapped and will be losing a player or two they'd rather not with no first round pick this year or next to reload.

No player other than a QB is worth this kind of money especially when giving up those kinds of picks.

Even though you spelled it out, there are plenty that still won’t get it.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Even though you spelled it out, there are plenty that still won’t get it.

Of course, and I know why.

1) The general habit among fans and media in not looking past the cap implications of the current season.

2) Compound that with wishful "win now" thinking when it is not plausible, and that is not 20/20 hindsight. I'll wait for the responses telling me how if the Packers had made that Mack trade and dumped Matthews to pay for it this team would have made it to the Super Bowl.

3) The value in cheap rookie contracts is generally underestimated. Alexander for 4 years / $12 mil total? This #12 pick around $16 mil for 4 years? Sure, there's always a chance of a bust, but that risk is sharply mitigated by the low cost. It's bad enough spending that kind of Mack money on one player who is not a franchise QB, but giving up that opportunity to rebuild a roster with high picks to replace aging and injury prone former stars? Foolish.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I said after that missed double doink this playoffs that the Bears are on an uphill climb. They pick just once this draft at (#87 overall) inside of the first 2 days of drafting. Meanwhile we pick 6 selections before their #119 pick.


GB is about to get an injection of talent between a couple of solid FA picks, the current draft capital in 2019 (partly heldover draft cap from 2018) and finally a relatively young team gaining some much needed seasoning.

I predict GB will improve by 3+ wins in 2019 and the Bears will regress into the 9-10 wins area

I didn't bring up the Mack example to throw shade on the Bears. It could have been Team X for all I care. Those comments were for illustration purposes only. I don't care what the Bears do unless it's something like matching Gutekunst's tender for Fuller or outbidding for Allen Robinson or taking Amos off the market.

I care that the Packers build a championship caliber roster. The rest comes after that.

 

[OldSchool101]

I didn't bring up the Mack example to throw shade on the Bears.

np. I gotcha covered. You just let me handle that!

 

[morango]

So, lets revist where we would be if the Packers had dealt for Mack on similar terms as the Bears using that $23.7 in usable FA cap space as illustrated in the above post.

Mack's cap number was $13.8 mil for 2018 and $22.3 mil for 2019. Those numbers alone put you $12.4 mil over the usable 2019 cap before the following adjustments.

Mack's 2018 number would have put the team over the cap at that time. The most plausible solution to get under the cap would have been to cut Matthews to pick up $11 mil in cap space. Had that been done, we'd now be standing at $1.4 mil over the usable FA cap space.

Further, the two first rounders this year are roughly equivalent to what the Bears gave up. So, if you're not signing those guys because you traded them you gain about $3.8 mil in cap if you swap out those guys for the next two guys below the top 53. That gets you to $2.4 mil in usable FA cap. Cut Perry and you get to $5.7 mil for FAs.

So, that leaves you with the current roster plus Mack, very little for FAs whether you cut Perry or not, and you've lost your two first round picks. Cut more of those guys in the list in the above post and you add some dough to the usable cap space.

Boil it down, and you would have traded two first round picks and surrendered $25 mil in cap space, i.e., 2 or 3 quality free agent signings now. One HOF Edge rusher for 4 or 5 players to rebuild the roster.

See why that would have been a terrible trade? And why I concluded from the get go that Gutekunst never got very far with that? You have to look past "win now" when you don't have a loaded roster with a bunch of rookie contract stars to begin with.

With the Bears making that deal and coming up short, they are cap strapped and will be losing a player or two they'd rather not with no first round pick this year or next to reload.

No player other than a QB is worth this kind of money especially when giving up those kinds of picks.

Hard Right I appreciate this thorough analysis. I knew at the time that it was unlikely, and sort of had a gut feeling it would be unwise, but you have the numbers there to back it up.

Thanks.

 

[gbgary]

had they signed mack they'd've had to do the rodgers extension differently. waited a year, at less money, less time. wait...that would've been a win-win!

 

[OldSchool101]

I would absolutely hire HRE to do my tax return. But somehow I have a gut feeling by the time he’s done crunching numbers I’m going to owe $
Forget that!

 

[elcid]

It's probably a good time to make the donuts again:

Cap committments for the current top 53 players + current dead cap: $163 - $164 mil depending whether you prefer overthecap or spotrac; lets call it $163.5 mil
Cap carryover from NFLPA: $7.9 mil
Estimated 2019 league cap: announced as in the range $187 - $191.1 mil; lets call it the midpoint at $189.0 mil

Current top 53 cap space = $33.4 mil before subtractions

Spotrac shows an estimated draft pool cap of $10.26 mil; overthecap is at $10.35 mil for the 10 picks using this chart [https://overthecap.com/draft/]; lets call in $10.3 mil. Assuming these 10 players replace the lowest cap players among the top 53 (10 x $495,000 = $5.0 mil with no dead cap), the net 2019 cap cost of the draft class comes to $5.3 mil.

Current top 43 + 10 draftess leaves $28.1 mil cap space before additional subtractions

Last season's practice squad salary was $129,200 per slot. Assuming a 7% bump in line with the salary cap bump, the 2019 estimated cap cost for the PS is $138,000 x 10 players = $1.4 mil.

Current top 43 + 10 draftees + PS leaves $26.7 mil cap space before additional subtractions

Something needs to be held in reserve for PUP/IR replacements. $3 mil is a reasonable number.

Current top 43 + 10 draftees + PS + PUP/IR replacments leaves $23.7 mil cap space after subtractions

That $23.7 mil cap space is your current working number for free agency. That number could go up with certain cuts, with the following players yielding the indicated cap savings:

• Perry: $3.33 mil if cut by March 14
• T. Williams: $4.8 mil if cut by March 14 (in contract year)
• Bulaga: $6.8 mil (in contract year)
• Crosby: $3.6 mil (in contract year)
• Graham: $5.3 mil if cut by March 14
• Daniels: $8.3 mil (in contract year)

I doubt we'll have any further clarity until early March. The team cap number and rookie scale were set on March 5 last season. Then it's fast and furious. Or not.

So this is without even resigning some of our own in the likes of Breeland, Tonyan, Gilbert, Allison, Wilkerson and Kumerow (in order of my own perceived priority)? All these players I see being brought back and this would probably leave us with roughly 10m to work with without further cuts.

I think a major factor for the success of our offseason will be if and at what cost we retain Breeland, who imo should be our top priority among our free agents. I'd be very confident in our CB group with Alexander, Breeland, King and Jackson, but if he walks I feel like the CB position should be addressed in the draft (again). Their seems to be mutual interest in a return to GB but estimating the size of his contract tends to be tricky. One would argue that there is no reason to see him settle on a contract bigger than the one he signed with the Panthers which got nullified, which I believe was 24m in 3 years. However I feel like a mediocre CB FA class might see him get annual earnings similar to that.

 

[HardRightEdge]

So this is without even resigning some of our own in the likes of Breeland, Tonyan, Gilbert, Allison, Wilkerson and Kumerow (in order of my own perceived priority)? All these players I see being brought back and this would probably leave us with roughly 10m to work with without further cuts.

Yes, those numbers do not include any cap deduction for signing any free agents of any kind, Packer players or otherwise.

Note that anybody listed in the following link as an exclusive rights free agent (ERFA), some of whom you've mentioned, should result in only very small bites into the cap space in my most recent bottom line number.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/green-bay-packers/

Exclusive rights FAs have no negotiating power. They must take what the team offers or sit out the year; consequently they are typically signed to something close to the minimum on a one year deal.

Note that minumum salary guys already under contract for 2019 in the $495,000 - $575,000 range are included in my bottom line number as part of the top 53 calculation. Draft picks from the 4th. round on down are also close to the minimum. If we assume ERFA's that are tendered replace those minimum salary guys (and actually make the final 53), their cost over and above those guys would be minimal. For example, Allison's 2018 ERFA tender was for $630,000. I doubt any of the players in question would do any better than that.

Keep in mind my projections are in the context of the cap contraints at the final cut down. Once the league year starts in March, rosters are filled out to 90 players, teams can and do go over the cap, then they must get under the cap at final cutdowns. I don't believe there is any guaranteed money in an ERFA contracts so if any are signed and then cut before opening day there's no dead cap. Consequently, I would not be surprised if all the ERFAs are signed for the 90 man roster to compete for jobs. The Packers signed 9 ERFAs last April.

https://247sports.com/nfl/green-bay...nine-exclusive-rights-free-agents--117454308/

 

[Deleted member 6794]

had they signed mack they'd've had to do the rodgers extension differently. waited a year, at less money, less time. wait...that would've been a win-win!

Rodgers would have still commanded a ton of money. It's simply not feasible to have the highest paid player in the league on offense and defense on the roster.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Rodgers would have still commanded a ton of money. It's simply not feasible to have the highest paid player in the league on offense and defense on the roster.

That's it in a nutshell. Had the Packers not extended Rodgers and signed Mack to a deal similar to Chicago's, the Packers would be over the cap right now (after necessary subtractions to come) even if Matthews had been cut before last season.

 

[PikeBadger]

Even though you spelled it out, there are plenty that still won’t get it.

Even some GM’s won’t get it. They don’t last long though. Just watch. The middle of March, we’ll again witness 2 or 3 knucklehead GM’s sign their death warrant. It’s an annual rite of spring.

 

[thequick12]

I'd cut Perry, Williams, and crosby unfortunately I like them but betting even 3.6 m that Perry stays healthy at this point just isn't worth it. Williams while adequete on the field and exceptional in the lockerroom just represents too big a savings against the cap at 4 .8 million. And crosby is not worth the 3.6 million cap savings cutting him would net. An undrafted rookie kicker at a far cheaper rate can hit 75% and if you get the right one or maybe spend a late rounder on one he might hit significantly better than 75%

That's 12 m saved, that can easily get you an Earl Thomas depending on how you set his contract up, maybe somebody else too. And Earl Thomas playing the single high playmaker role in pettines scheme is way more valuable than whatever you might get out of Perry, Williams, and crosby.

I'd be tempted to cut Mike Daniels to save the 8.5 million as I'm not sure he's got it anymore between injuries and age. But in the end I think I keep him for one last go around.

So if they start with 39 million in cap space and cut those three guys they end up with 51 million in cap to spend. That's a pretty nice scenario.

You could sign
Earl Thomas 3 years 30 million 15 million guranteed 7.5 million cap hit
Dee Ford 4 years 48 million 24 million guranteed 8.4 million cap hit
Anthony Barr 4 years 48 million 24 million guranteed 8.4 m cap hit

And trade for
Antonio Brown 13 million cap hit

And still have plenty of space, 13.5 million, left to sign the draft class and protect for in season injury

 

[HardRightEdge]

Even some GM’s won’t get it. They don’t last long though. Just watch. The middle of March, we’ll again witness 2 or 3 knucklehead GM’s sign their death warrant. It’s an annual rite of spring.

There might be a GM or two who have their job on the strength of a scouting reputation while not being very good with numbers. But every team has a cap guru, whether the GM himself or a Russ Ball type.

A GM who mortgages the future in signing declining stars up to his cap limit may not be bad at math, though. He could be taking a low odds risk to try to save his job. Or he could have a meddling owner looking to spark some excitement in order to sell more season tickets.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'd cut Perry, Williams, and crosby unfortunately I like them but betting even 3.6 m that Perry stays healthy at this point just isn't worth it. Williams while adequete on the field and exceptional in the lockerroom just represents too big a savings against the cap at 4 .8 million. And crosby is not worth the 3.6 million cap savings cutting him would net. An undrafted rookie kicker at a far cheaper rate can hit 75% and if you get the right one or maybe spend a late rounder on one he might hit significantly better than 75%

That's 12 m saved, that can easily get you an Earl Thomas depending on how you set his contract up, maybe somebody else too. And Earl Thomas playing the single high playmaker role in pettines scheme is way more valuable than whatever you might get out of Perry, Williams, and crosby.

I'd be tempted to cut Mike Daniels to save the 8.5 million as I'm not sure he's got it anymore between injuries and age. But in the end I think I keep him for one last go around.

So if they start with 39 million in cap space and cut those three guys they end up with 51 million in cap to spend. That's a pretty nice scenario.

You could sign
Earl Thomas 3 years 30 million 15 million guranteed 7.5 million cap hit
Dee Ford 4 years 48 million 24 million guranteed 8.4 million cap hit
Anthony Barr 4 years 48 million 24 million guranteed 8.4 m cap hit

And trade for
Antonio Brown 13 million cap hit

And still have plenty of space, 13.5 million, left to sign the draft class and protect for in season injury

According to Over The Cap the Packers currently have $35.3 million of cap space. They would save $11.6 million by releasing Williams, Crosby and Perry for a total $46.9 million of cap space. The team trading for Brown at this point would result in a cap hit of $15.1 million

While your math isn't that much off the Packers would only have $7.5 million of cap space remaining. That's not enough to sign the draft class, account for players #52 and #53 counting against the cap starting in week 1, establish a practice squad and have some space left for injury replacements.

 

[PikeBadger]

There might be a GM or two who have their job on the strength of a scouting reputation while not being very good with numbers. But every team has a cap guru, whether the GM himself or a Russ Ball type.

A GM who mortgages the future in signing declining stars up to his cap limit may not be bad at math, though. He could be taking a low odds risk to try to save his job. Or he could have a medding owner looking to spark some excitement in order to sell more season tickets.

Agree. Those are indeed possibilities. They also could be totally incompetent at roster building.

 

[OldSchool101]

I'd cut Perry, Williams, and crosby unfortunately I like them but betting even 3.6 m that Perry stays healthy at this point just isn't worth it. Williams while adequete on the field and exceptional in the lockerroom just represents too big a savings against the cap at 4 .8 million. And crosby is not worth the 3.6 million cap savings cutting him would net. An undrafted rookie kicker at a far cheaper rate can hit 75% and if you get the right one or maybe spend a late rounder on one he might hit significantly better than 75%

That's 12 m saved, that can easily get you an Earl Thomas depending on how you set his contract up, maybe somebody else too. And Earl Thomas playing the single high playmaker role in pettines scheme is way more valuable than whatever you might get out of Perry, Williams, and crosby.

I'd be tempted to cut Mike Daniels to save the 8.5 million as I'm not sure he's got it anymore between injuries and age. But in the end I think I keep him for one last go around.

So if they start with 39 million in cap space and cut those three guys they end up with 51 million in cap to spend. That's a pretty nice scenario.

You could sign
Earl Thomas 3 years 30 million 15 million guranteed 7.5 million cap hit
Dee Ford 4 years 48 million 24 million guranteed 8.4 million cap hit
Anthony Barr 4 years 48 million 24 million guranteed 8.4 m cap hit

And trade for
Antonio Brown 13 million cap hit

And still have plenty of space, 13.5 million, left to sign the draft class and protect for in season injury

I like the meat of your plan. Except I believe D Ford and E Thomas together command at least 10-15% more than your estimate. I’ll pass on Barr and find a veteran OL or Slot receiver for half of the $ of what Barr would command and protect my QB.

 

[thequick12]

I like the meat of your plan. Except I believe D Ford and E Thomas together command at least 10-15% more than your estimate. I’d pass on Barr and find a veteran OL for half of the $ of what Barr would command and protect my QB.

Ford might get 14/15 m a year but that would still work. I don't think Thomas gets more than 10 per idk maybe I'll be wrong but I just don't see it.

As for Barr I think at 12 m he'd turn out to be a steal. The Vikings have been playing him out of position his whole career. He's a prototypical 3-4 olb. A position he played for two seasons in college and racked up 23.5 sacks. He's 6-5 255 and ran a 4.66 at the combine and 4.41 at his pro day. Sign him and put him back at his true position and I think he puts together an impact season

 

[OldSchool101]

Ford might get 14/15 m a year but that would still work. I don't think Thomas gets more than 10 per idk maybe I'll be wrong but I just don't see it.

As for Barr I think at 12 m he'd turn out to be a steal. The Vikings have been playing him out of position his whole career. He's a prototypical 3-4 olb. A position he played for two seasons in college and racked up 23.5 sacks. He's 6-5 255 and ran a 4.66 at the combine and 4.41 at his pro day. Sign him and put him back at his true position and I think he puts together an impact season

We don’t have the cap to sign all those players. Keep in mind we often overlook that we generally hold a reserve account ($5M m+-range) to sign players throughout the year due to injury. You also have to sign your rookies and when you have a couple of 1st rounders those miscellaneous contracts add up quickly.
We likely have enough space to sign 2 of the 3 but the math just doesn’t work. We’d have 5M to work with, that’s why I’m saying use it to sign a Slot or Guard to emphasize the Offense a smidgen. We also have to make a decision with Cobb. He’s overpaid but do you walk him? Leaves us very thin at seasoned WR.
I’m honestly not trying to ruin your plan I swear. Lol