2024 Salary Cap as related to Free Agency

AKCheese

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
2,326
Reaction score
733
Re: Bakh 2023 was a one game size - another year older - another year away from the game. As far as “owing” GB a team friendly deal. Things don’t work that way - it’s what have you done for me lately - both ways. And it should be. I have a feeling he’ll be released and then he can decide on resigning with either GB or NYJ. Playing with his pal is probably alluring but - Jets play on carpet - which he HATES (and could be ******* his knee)
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
IF he is healthy and able to play he has proven is more likely to play all pro level than below average....placing a contract so crazy low on the books but throwing that many incentives can WRECK cap wise the way those are applied to the years depending.

Your bolded part is exactly why I wouldn't give Bahk diddly squat in the way of guarantees, including a guaranteed salary if he is healthy and on the roster. ;)

Nobody is debating what level Bahk can play when he is on the field, but come on man, he has been a money pit since his new contract kicked in, back in 2021. Gute and the Packers would be absolutely nuts to double down on his health again and commit cap harikari by guaranteeing him any money. Given the way Walker was playing LT by the end of the season, that would raise the lunacy of doing it to an even higher level.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,871
Reaction score
4,841
Your bolded part is exactly why I wouldn't give Bahk diddly squat in the way of guarantees, including a guaranteed salary if he is healthy and on the roster. ;)

Nobody is debating what level Bahk can play when he is on the field, but come on man, he has been a money pit since his new contract kicked in, back in 2021. Gute and the Packers would be absolutely nuts to double down on his health again and commit cap harikari by guaranteeing him any money. Given the way Walker was playing LT by the end of the season, that would raise the lunacy of doing it to an even higher level.

if you can essentially save the same or just about as if you cut him - Gute would be the dumbest GM in the world to not see if they can come to an agreement. Save 19M and he isn't here...or save say 17M and he is and may be of value....
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
if you can essentially save the same or just about as if you cut him - Gute would be the dumbest GM in the world to not see if they can come to an agreement. Save 19M and he isn't here...or save say 17M and he is and may be of value....
I never ruled that out. Where we differ is what that new contract would look like. Not sure who's numbers are correct, but I am seeing they save $21,499,363 by cutting him. The dead cap is really a mute point, since it is money "owed" to accounting, just a matter of whether it all hits this year, spread over 2 or maybe 3 with a resign. Until March 15th, the Packers owe no new money to Bahk (on his current contract).

So he and the Pack rip up his current contract and ink a new deal. What does that deal look like to you?

For me, it looks like this. No roster bonuses, only large bonuses for being on the active game roster ($500K/game). Minimal base salary (not guaranteed) and incentives tied to Pro Bowl, Snaps and any other incentives that can be tied to a guy playing at a medium to high level at LT.

If he doesn't want it or something near it, "Thanks David, good luck in New York and happy early 33rd birthday."
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,871
Reaction score
4,841
I never ruled that out. Where we differ is what that new contract would look like. Not sure who's numbers are correct, but I am seeing they save $21,499,363 by cutting him. The dead cap is really a mute point, since it is money "owed" to accounting, just a matter of whether it all hits this year, spread over 2 or maybe 3 with a resign. Until March 15th, the Packers owe no new money to Bahk (on his current contract).

So he and the Pack rip up his current contract and ink a new deal. What does that deal look like to you?

For me, it looks like this. No roster bonuses, only large bonuses for being on the active game roster ($500K/game). Minimal base salary (not guaranteed) and incentives tied to Pro Bowl, Snaps and any other incentives that can be tied to a guy playing at a medium to high level at LT.

If he doesn't want it or something near it, "Thanks David, good luck in New York and happy early 33rd birthday."

I strongly don't believe he will end up in NY truthfully. He has been one of the most vocal against their turf conditions. I don't think for a second he wants to do that.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
I strongly don't believe he will end up in NY truthfully. He has been one of the most vocal against their turf conditions. I don't think for a second he wants to do that.
Could be. If so, that would narrow his choices to 14 other teams, besides the Packers.

Arizona CardinalsState Farm StadiumGrass
Baltimore RavensM&T Bank StadiumGrass
Chicago BearsSoldier FieldGrass
Cleveland BrownsFirstEnergy StadiumGrass
Denver BroncosEmpower Field at Mile HighGrass
Green Bay PackersLambeau FieldGrass
Jacksonville JaguarsTIAA Bank FieldGrass
Kansas City ChiefsArrowhead StadiumGrass
Las Vegas RaidersAllegiant StadiumGrass
Miami DolphinsHardRock StadiumGrass
Philadelphia EaglesLincoln Financial FieldGrass
Pittsburgh SteelersAcrisure Stadium Grass
San Francisco 49ersLevi's StadiumGrass
Tampa Bay BuccaneersRaymond James StadiumGrass
Washington CommandersFedEx FieldGrass
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,871
Reaction score
4,841
Could be. If so, that would narrow his choices to 14 other teams, besides the Packers.

Arizona CardinalsState Farm StadiumGrass
Baltimore RavensM&T Bank StadiumGrass
Chicago BearsSoldier FieldGrass
Cleveland BrownsFirstEnergy StadiumGrass
Denver BroncosEmpower Field at Mile HighGrass
Green Bay PackersLambeau FieldGrass
Jacksonville JaguarsTIAA Bank FieldGrass
Kansas City ChiefsArrowhead StadiumGrass
Las Vegas RaidersAllegiant StadiumGrass
Miami DolphinsHardRock StadiumGrass
Philadelphia EaglesLincoln Financial FieldGrass
Pittsburgh SteelersAcrisure StadiumGrass
San Francisco 49ersLevi's StadiumGrass
Tampa Bay BuccaneersRaymond James StadiumGrass
Washington CommandersFedEx FieldGrass

Not every in door though has that same type of turf though I believe right? Completely clueless just disclosing that on field materials.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
I strongly don't believe he will end up in NY truthfully. He has been one of the most vocal against their turf conditions. I don't think for a second he wants to do that.
Definitely a difference in 2024 games on turf for the Jets and Packers.

Jets: 4 games on grass, 13 on artificial turn.

Packers: 12 games on grass, 5 games on Turf (Lions, Vikings, Rams, Titans & Seahawks)
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
Not every in door though has that same type of turf though I believe right? Completely clueless just disclosing that on field materials.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Seems every stadium has its own make of turf, grass and a combination of everything. If I am recalling correctly, Met Life artificial turf isn't popular with players, but then again FedEx Field is/was know to be a horrible grass surface for the WTF team.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
Not every in door though has that same type of turf though I believe right? Completely clueless just disclosing that on field materials.
Yes and some indoor stadiums (Cardinals and Raiders) have natural grass. Those are pretty cool systems, but who knows how the players like it.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,871
Reaction score
4,841
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Seems every stadium has its own make of turf, grass and a combination of everything. If I am recalling correctly, Met Life artificial turf isn't popular with players, but then again FedEx Field is/was know to be a horrible grass surface for the WTF team.

I tend to feel I've heard the same.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
I tend to feel I've heard the same.
Something a guy like Bahk, with his knees probably thinks about and puts some weight in to. As would a speed burner that prefers the quickness of turn over grass. Lots of factors when it comes to the field and weather for sure. Would be interesting to know just how many players think about it and how they weigh it, when they have multiple teams offering them contracts.
 

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,355
Reaction score
1,740
I fully agree. I think he has had 5 surgical procedures since he signed his new contract in 2020. He is still a few months from "recovery" from his last procedure. He's played in 13 games in the last 3 seasons and has barely practiced during that time. Any team that would agree to a trade for him, would be picking up the final year of his contract, which would call for them paying him $21,499,363. That isn't happening, not even for a 7th round pick.

My hunch is that he and Aaron have already figured things out, he is waiting to be cut and will sign with the Jets. He will be willing to take a minimal contract, packed with all sorts of playing incentives and be reunited with his buddy to finish both of their NFL careers in NY.
That would be a cool way to go out on his own terms. I hope it happens.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
2,688
Reaction score
1,548
I think you answered your own question with "Pack finished with consecutive 13 win seasons" and by doing so, they didn't see the need to go crazy in Free Agency or trades. Basically, they had a solid team and could concentrate on slight tweaks and drafting for the future and some for the present.

What they have now is a young team, that appears to be on a quick development path, created by a lot of young players, to being a very solid team. However, they lack in a few key starting positions, Safety, CB and possibly ILB. They shouldn't try and fill the holes in the secondary with rookies, no matter how high they are drafted.

The other thing going on is/was their cap situation. In 2021, 22, and 23, they were a team headed for cap-tastrophy. They saw it, knew they couldn't lock up any new money in high end free agents or starters obtained in trades. So they sat on their 13 win roster, grabbed some low end FA bargains, drafted for the future and got cap healthy.

So far, it looks like their plan took wings and is working. The team is young, developing and they are getting cap healthy. Time to spend some money and plug the holes with 1-2 high level starting Free agents.
I respectfully disagree that those 13 win teams did not have holes. They obviously were not good enough to even get to a SB let alone win one. IMO they absolutely were deficient at both WR and TE as far as pass catching depth. I don't remember a top tier defense either. It will be interesting to see just what type of cap room this current group will provide once Love has signed a new contract. I am also wondering if the re-structure of Gary's contract is just the beginning of pushing money out as they have done previously. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of going for it now. I will just have to see it to believe it based on history. It will be an interesting off-season. Either way, I doubt if my question "why now and not then"? will be answered.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
384
Reaction score
293
Let me start by saying I agree with you. Your post has got me thinking a bit. This would be a major change in philosophy.
Yeah; that in itself would be very exciting to see happen.

When the Pack finished with consecutive 13 win seasons, one might think that was a SB window. Yet, they did not make any splash trades or significant FA signings. They did not draft for need, they stayed with BPA. I have to wonder, what makes this time different? Does Gute have the Jerry Krause syndrome?
I think he learned a few things from TT's mistakes, and his own.

As we've watched the last 30 years of Packer history unfold (Wolf-Holmgren-Favre leading through Sherman-Favre into Thompson-McCarthy-Favre/Rodgers, then Gutekunst-Lafleur-Rodgers/Love), one thing I think we've all noticed is the way each generation seems to learn from mistakes made by their predecessors. For example, Rodgers learning the importance of protecting the ball by standing on the sideline watching McCarthy have a stroke every time Favre threw a stupid interception (to the point where he was afraid to throw anything less than a foolproof perfect pass), and now Love already indicating he learned the importance of taking a risk when he needs to make a play. He's learned the best lessons from both of his predecessors.

Ron Wolf said his biggest mistake was overestimating how much Favre could do with just decent receivers, and not getting him better wideouts to take maximum advantage of his arm - which was a mistake that was not made as much with Rodgers, and clearly is not being made with Love. I think Ted's biggest mistake was assuming that just because Rodgers gave you a good chance of winning the Super Bowl every season, the Packers could take a moderate approach to strengthening the rest of the team. And I think Gutekunst made that same mistake in 2019-21.

Wolf, Thompson, and even Gutekunst conceivably left several Lombardis unclaimed over the last 20+ years by overestimating their quarterback and not being more aggressive in years when one or two of the right moves might have made a difference. I have a gut feeling Gute may have learned from that mistake and is adjusting to it.

We may have a better idea in about 2 weeks.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
384
Reaction score
293
Gute is many things but a man cornered into a thought is not one of them, and I think we may be heading for a double safety, double LB in the first two days type draft or close to that...stock up on motivated hungry youth and see if you can hit again, cuz you've now got numerous other spots set with now experienced youth that have proven capable.
Are you seeing this as simply 2 safeties and 2 LBs in the draft, or some mix-and-match combination of 2-3 draft picks and 1-2 FAs/trades? Because I agree, he really has to double up on those spots this spring, but I'd feel a lot more comfortable if at least one of the 4 additions were a solid vet - preferably at safety, because I think we can more easily afford to ease a rookie linebacker into the flow than we can a safety. I think having top-notch, dependable safety help is mission critical right from Week One, and I'm not sure I trust any of our current crew to meet that standard.

I have mixed feelings about going FA for a linebacker, though. I really don't know how many of the UFA LBs are good value for what Hafley's defense is going to need at that layer of the D. I do believe we can get solid FA value at safety, though.
 
OP
OP
OldSchool101
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,289
Reaction score
5,683
I doubt unemployment is even on Bahk's "1000 concerns" list. Unless of course he spent all his money on beer and hair conditioner.

I don't have a problem with the Packers keeping Bahk, if they were 100% sure that the only thing keeping him off the field in 2024 is a players strike or a completely unrelated injury. The problem with that, they have to commit $9.5M to him on 3/15/24, which is his guaranteed roster bonus for being on the team as of that date. If that wasn't on the table, I think they keep him, see how he is progressing and either trade, release or roster him before Sept. Eventually, he would also collect a $700K workout bonus, if he fulfilled the obligations of that.

Now if he is on the Packer roster in Sept. that will cost the Packers another $10.7M + about a $30K Per Game Active Bonus.

Really it boils down to whether the Packers think Bahk is worth $21M this year, a decision they will have to make in about 2 weeks. If he isn't or if they don't know whether he will be, then if they can't find a trade partner, cut him loose.
Maybe im confused here. Are you saying the Packers cannot do a restructure before that March date if he consents?
My interpretation (and maybe I’m wrong idk) is if Bak restructured tomorrow morning we’d only owe him $19.5M ish from his old contract
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,871
Reaction score
4,841
Are you seeing this as simply 2 safeties and 2 LBs in the draft, or some mix-and-match combination of 2-3 draft picks and 1-2 FAs/trades? Because I agree, he really has to double up on those spots this spring, but I'd feel a lot more comfortable if at least one of the 4 additions were a solid vet - preferably at safety, because I think we can more easily afford to ease a rookie linebacker into the flow than we can a safety. I think having top-notch, dependable safety help is mission critical right from Week One, and I'm not sure I trust any of our current crew to meet that standard.

I have mixed feelings about going FA for a linebacker, though. I really don't know how many of the UFA LBs are good value for what Hafley's defense is going to need at that layer of the D. I do believe we can get solid FA value at safety, though.

I said in the first two days of the draft, it’s just something I sense more and more he may do as he did in TE room.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
525
Location
Madison, WI
Minimal base salary (not guaranteed)
I’m more in the camp of keeping him if the contract works out, and I assume that means a structure that allows him to earn more or less that 21m in incentives….

Bhak is a vested veteran. His salary is 100% guaranteed if he is on the roster week 1.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
384
Reaction score
293
I said in the first two days of the draft, it’s just something I sense more and more he may do as he did in TE room.
That surprises me, considering the importance Hafley places on that posiition. Free safety is arguably the key position on the defense - the one he says he counts on to make everything else work, and limit the explosive plays to which his scheme is inherently somewhat susceptible - and at the same time, probably our weakest position group on the defensive side of the ball.

It's also a position where (historically) it's a big "ask" to bring in a fresh draft pick and expect him to be at the top of the depth chart his first year. There's a learning curve, especially when this isn't a really great year to be drafting safeties.

Are you expecting to sign Savage, and for him to have a comeback year? Because absent that, all we have in-house are AJJ, Owens, and Ford. I can't imagine any of them stepping up to fill the shoes Hafley has in mind. You're a lot better at this than I am, but it seems reckless to me for Gute to count on finding at least one and maybe two kids in the draft who can step in and take charge.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,871
Reaction score
4,841
That surprises me, considering the importance Hafley places on that posiition. Free safety is arguably the key position on the defense - the one he says he counts on to make everything else work, and limit the explosive plays to which his scheme is inherently somewhat susceptible - and at the same time, probably our weakest position group on the defensive side of the ball.

It's also a position where (historically) it's a big "ask" to bring in a fresh draft pick and expect him to be at the top of the depth chart his first year. There's a learning curve, especially when this isn't a really great year to be drafting safeties.

Are you expecting to sign Savage, and for him to have a comeback year? Because absent that, all we have in-house are AJJ, Owens, and Ford. I can't imagine any of them stepping up to fill the shoes Hafley has in mind. You're a lot better at this than I am, but it seems reckless to me for Gute to count on finding at least one and maybe two kids in the draft who can step in and take charge.

Savage was in the top 15 safeties last year (400 snap minimum) grade wise per PFF and honestly anyone that thinks he wasn't top 20 at minimum just didn't watch football much...he doesn't need a comeback year, it would be sustaining his play into a second year. I don't think we bring back both he and Nixon, I sense we bring back one of them and Nixon will be cheaper so I'm leaning to Nixon.

Savage is going to make more than we will want to spend on him
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,871
Reaction score
4,841
Preston restructured - just $2M saved...but again these small shavings and nothing on Bakh tells me they are attempting a shred and restart with Bakh potentially.
 

SudsMcBucky

Cheesehead
Joined
May 17, 2022
Messages
185
Reaction score
146
Location
Buford, GA
Maybe im confused here. Are you saying the Packers cannot do a restructure before that March date if he consents?
My interpretation (and maybe I’m wrong idk) is if Bak restructured tomorrow morning we’d only owe him $19.5M ish from his old contract
What would be the terms of the restructure? Can't answer your question without knowing that. And maybe I'm confused by the way you worded your question, but no, we would not "owe" him that $19.1 as that was the signing bonus we've already paid him. That $19.1 is what would hit our cap as the remainder of the proration if he were cut or traded.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
Bhak is a vested veteran. His salary is 100% guaranteed if he is on the roster week 1.
Right, but given his injury history, any new/restructured deal should have very few, if any guarantees. Plain and simple, come Sept. if it looks like he is done, the Packers should be able to release him before the final roster is declared and have no financial loss.

Easy for me to say, but if I was in Bahk's shoes, I would be just fine doing a deal with no guarantees and plenty of incentives. Especially with the team that just paid me a crap load of money and I didn't play/earn much of it.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,173
Reaction score
7,960
Location
Madison, WI
Maybe im confused here. Are you saying the Packers cannot do a restructure before that March date if he consents?
My interpretation (and maybe I’m wrong idk) is if Bak restructured tomorrow morning we’d only owe him $19.5M ish from his old contract
We don't "owe" him a penny right now. All the "dead cap" money is money that was already physically paid out to him. All it represents is that money that was "shoved out" in the NFL way of accounting.

When we would owe him money is if he is still on the team on March 15th, which is when his roster bonus of $9.5M kicks in. Something odd, I went to check that number on Spotrac and it no longer exists. Not sure if it was a mistake and removed. I have seen it mentioned in articles before, so I do think they still have that deadline to make a decision on Bahk.

The Packers and Bahk can do a restructure today (or anytime) if they both agree to it. Now the Packers can't do a thing, without Bahks consent. Since there is only 1 year left on his contract, they can't even play with pushing more money out, not even through declaring him a post 6/1 cut.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top