Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension

[Pokerbrat2000]

And 85% ish of that number is Gary and Clark being traded. Not void years.

Each player could have e had void years, but it didn’t matter. Once the player leaves the team, the pending cap charges are due.

It is hard to find the full breakdown of their contracts, but I believe Clark's contract included void years. Really doesn't matter though if it was void years or just cap pushed out, both players dead cap hits have been big.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

With 34 of it being Kenny Clark and Rashan Gary. 2027 is VERY clearn relative to norms these days with just 8.6 (Hobbs and McManus) the hit.

And really the only "maybe candidates" like we all knew Clark and Gary were potentially could be:

Josh Jacobs - if walked after this year 3.125M
Aaron Banks - if walked after this year 26.2M...but as many of us noticed he's here for this year and next honestly regardless unless he gets autrocious.
St. Juste - if walked be 1.5M

While I agree with your "maybe candidates" take, you just really never know. Players can sustain bad injuries or suddenly not earning their keep, that cutting/trading them is the best way out.

 

[tynimiller]

It is hard to find the full breakdown of their contracts, but I believe Clark's contract included void years. Really doesn't matter though if it was void years or just cap pushed out, both players dead cap hits have been big.

Yes I do know for a fact some void years was involved but cannot figure out how much as it all accellerated forward on us when we moved him anyways.

 

[tynimiller]

While I agree with your "maybe candidates" take, you just really never know. Players can sustain bad injuries or suddenly not earning their keep, that cutting/trading them is the best way out.

Oh of course...but I'm not gonna be the fool just listing every single player.

 

[mradtke66]

It is hard to find the full breakdown of their contracts, but I believe Clark's contract included void years. Really doesn't matter though if it was void years or just cap pushed out, both players dead cap hits have been big.

You can dislike the bonus structures of many modern contracts, but in this case, the void years don't matter. There was unrealized cap charges, they got accelerated when the players left the Packers. It wouldn't matter if they were cut, traded as they were, or the remaining years on the contracts were void years.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You can dislike the bonus structures of many modern contracts, but in this case, the void years don't matter. There was unrealized cap charges, they got accelerated when the players left the Packers. It wouldn't matter if they were cut, traded as they were, or the remaining years on the contracts were void years.

I think timing of how much money is pushed out and when it hits the cap is important. If I am a GM and in rebuild mode, I want to take as many of my future cap hits now. Clean those slates for the coming seasons, when having extra cap on hand could be what you need to make a run for a Super Bowl.

This might not apply to the Packers so much, since every season seems to bring the promise of fielding a solid team and having a shot at the Lombardi. That can be a good thing and a bad thing. Good when it works out, but bad when it doesn't and suddenly, your dead cap is piling up.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yes I do know for a fact some void years was involved but cannot figure out how much as it all accellerated forward on us when we moved him anyways.

Let's not forget that the Packers took quite a big dead cap hit on Clarks contract last season too. If my memory is correct, it was something like $18M last season and $17M this season.

 

[mradtke66]

Let's not forget that the Packers took quite a big dead cap hit on Clarks contract last season too. If my memory is correct, it was something like $18M last season and $17M this season.

Correct, because the trade was post June 1. That let the Packers split the hit over two seasons rather than one.

The piper was due his 35m, it was just a question of how it hit the books.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Let's not forget that the Packers took quite a big dead cap hit on Clarks contract last season too. If my memory is correct, it was something like $18M last season and $17M this season.

Wow, I had no idea the cap hit for Clark was so big. I thought trading him would have lowered that, but it all depends on what was part of the trade deal, or not.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Correct, because the trade was post June 1. That let the Packers split the hit over two seasons rather than one.

The piper was due his 35m, it was just a question of how it hit the books.

That's interesting, thanks. I had no idea Clark's dead-cap hit was so large, and I thought all remaining comp guarantees were brought forward into the current season. I guess because it was post June 1, they can split between two seasons. I don't understand that distinction - pre and post June 1.

As you say, the piper gets paid, it's just a matter of when.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I think timing of how much money is pushed out and when it hits the cap is important. If I am a GM and in rebuild mode, I want to take as many of my future cap hits now. Clean those slates for the coming seasons, when having extra cap on hand could be what you need to make a run for a Super Bowl.

This might not apply to the Packers so much, since every season seems to bring the promise of fielding a solid team and having a shot at the Lombardi. That can be a good thing and a bad thing. Good when it works out, but bad when it doesn't and suddenly, your dead cap is piling up.

Agree that a rebuilding team is better off recognizing as much dead cap as soon as possible. There are always outliers. I think the Saints currently have $175 mil in dead cap, not sure when that has to be realized, but probably this season.

That leaves them in a better position next season. Of course, no team will admit that they're giving up on a season, and the fans definitely don't like it. There just aren't any good options after so many bad decisions.

 

[mradtke66]

Agree that a rebuilding team is better off recognizing as much dead cap as soon as possible. There are always outliers. I think the Saints currently have $175 mil in dead cap, not sure when that has to be realized, but probably this season.

Dead cap is always "this season." Other than Post June 1 reasons, dead cap is only dead cap once the player is no longer on the team.

That leaves them in a better position next season. Of course, no team will admit that they're giving up on a season, and the fans definitely don't like it. There just aren't any good options after so many bad decisions.

The Saints are probably the worst example of cap management in a while. Had they accepted a year of rebuild after Brees retired, they would have been fine. Instead, they kept thinking they were going to be competitive, and signed free agents to keep the window open.

Of course, they were a little cap tight, so they had to sign bargain, older players. And give them bonus spread over more years to afford them, typically with a void year or two. Those players eventually retired or were trash, giving them some dead cap to deal with.

AND still they deluded themselves and kept thinking they were going to be competitive, and signed free agents to keep the window open. They followed the same pattern and now with some restructure magic to ease the hits of their already existing and sometimes mediocre players.

Finally all of their dumb contracts are finally cleaned up. Next year will give them a ton of room. They should be competitive, but they need to not be stupid with any FAs spending. Since they will have so much cap space in 2027, the smart play would be lower signing bonuses coupled with higher than typical base salaries which could be guaranteed.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Wow, I had no idea the cap hit for Clark was so big. I thought trading him would have lowered that, but it all depends on what was part of the trade deal, or not.

While it was already a sunk cost of having Clark on the roster in the future, it was kind of a "hidden" immediate (2 years) cost to the Packers to trade him.

You can't trade away already accrued cap (Clark's $35M). Meaning, you can't trade the player and his dead cap hits. The only thing the Packers were able to trade away with Clark was any future contractual money due to him and spready that dead cap hit out over 2 seasons.

Sometimes, in a situation where a players current contract (future money) is too steep for the team wanting to trade for the player, the current team will take on part of the contract.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Dead cap is always "this season." Other than Post June 1 reasons, dead cap is only dead cap once the player is no longer on the team.



The Saints are probably the worst example of cap management in a while. Had they accepted a year of rebuild after Brees retired, they would have been fine. Instead, they kept thinking they were going to be competitive, and signed free agents to keep the window open.

Of course, they were a little cap tight, so they had to sign bargain, older players. And give them bonus spread over more years to afford them, typically with a void year or two. Those players eventually retired or were trash, giving them some dead cap to deal with.

AND still they deluded themselves and kept thinking they were going to be competitive, and signed free agents to keep the window open. They followed the same pattern and now with some restructure magic to ease the hits of their already existing and sometimes mediocre players.

Finally all of their dumb contracts are finally cleaned up. Next year will give them a ton of room. They should be competitive, but they need to not be stupid with any FAs spending. Since they will have so much cap space in 2027, the smart play would be lower signing bonuses coupled with higher than typical base salaries which could be guaranteed.

Thanks for the history of mismanagement by the Saints. Cautionary tale.

It sounds like they'll be in good cap shape next year. But rebuilding isn't as simple as having draft picks and the $$$ and cap to sign players. That requires a solid GM. I have no idea who their GM is (was?), but whoever that person is, they should not be working for the Saints anymore…….

Makes me appreciate the good GMs the Packers have had the last 30 years - Wolf, TT, Gluten. Each one had a different way of managing personnel, but all have been successful, with Wolf and TT winning SBs in 97 and 2011. Gluten's turn! And yes, he has yet to cement his legacy as one of the great GMs in club history.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

Thanks for the history of mismanagement by the Saints. Cautionary tale.

It sounds like they'll be in good cap shape next year. But rebuilding isn't as simple as having draft picks and the $$$ and cap to sign players. That requires a solid GM. I have no idea who their GM is (was?), but whoever that person is, they should not be working for the Saints anymore…….

Makes me appreciate the good GMs the Packers have had the last 30 years - Wolf, TT, Gluten. Each one had a different way of managing personnel, but all have been successful, with Wolf and TT winning SBs in 97 and 2011. Gluten's turn! And yes, he has yet to cement his legacy as one of the great GMs in club history.

I think our GMs have done well in the financial management of the team and have put a pretty good product on the field. Ultimately it's up to the players and coaches to achieve success on the field, but Wolf, Ten and Gutey have all given them a chance to succeed by bringing in a lot of quality players.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

And if Jacobs IS there, can he perform at a high level with the Sword of Damocles hanging over him?

I don't know what Jacobs situation will eventually be, or how he'll handle it. That's an unknown, and there's not much that can be done about it at present, so I'll not invest a lot of energy in worrying about it.

As they say, every time a door closes, another one opens...And it may just have opened wide for Marshawn Lloyd. If (a big if) he can stay healthy and be the player GB thought he might be when they drafted him, Jacobs' situation might matter a little less from a team perspective.

So many questions yet to be answered...It must be June.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That's an unknown, and there's not much that can be done about it at present, so I'll not invest a lot of energy in worrying about it.

While I agree that the situation is tricky and the outcome unknown, the Packers are hopefully working behind the scenes. First, keeping a close eye on if charges are being brought and/or what the NFL is planing to do.

What also could be done is to bring in a potential replacement for Jacobs. If Jacobs is exonerated and is not suspended, then no harm, you have a proven 1-2 punch at RB. I wouldn't rely on an unproven and injury prone Lloyd and Brooks is fine at #3 or even #2, but not a starter. There are some decent RB's still out there and I don't think the Packers would have to break the bank on one of them. Joe Mixon and Najee Harris are 2 free agent options. Both are coming off of injuries, so not sure where either are at. There is also the trade avenue. Guys like Tyler Allgeier (Arizona) and Alvin Kamara (Saints) are backups on their teams and with a cut/trade, would same their current team quite a bit of money.

 

[tynimiller]

While I agree that the situation is tricky and the outcome unknown, the Packers are hopefully working behind the scenes. First, keeping a close eye on if charges are being brought and/or what the NFL is planing to do.

What also could be done is to bring in a potential replacement for Jacobs. If Jacobs is exonerated and is not suspended, then no harm, you have a proven 1-2 punch at RB. I wouldn't rely on an unproven and injury prone Lloyd and Brooks is fine at #3 or even #2, but not a starter. There are some decent RB's still out there and I don't think the Packers would have to break the bank on one of them. Joe Mixon and Najee Harris are 2 free agent options. Both are coming off of injuries, so not sure where either are at. There is also the trade avenue. Guys like Tyler Allgeier (Arizona) and Alvin Kamara (Saints) are backups on their teams and with a cut/trade, would same their current team quite a bit of money.

I for sure can imagine that somewhere Gute and Co. have a list and thoughts on the FAs and also potential trade targets ready to rock if needed.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I for sure can imagine that somewhere Gute and Co. have a list and thoughts on the FAs and also potential trade targets ready to rock if needed.

Some of us think it is needed sooner, rather than when it is a MUST (Jacobs isn't playing).

I get people wanting to see Lloyd and that he has potential. But even if the Jacobs issue goes away and he isn't suspended, Joe Mixon or Najee Harris, if healthy and at the right price, solidifies your RB depth. Let Lloyd and Brooks battle for that #3 spot.

 

[tynimiller]

Some of us think it is needed sooner, rather than when it is a MUST (Jacobs isn't playing).

I get people wanting to see Lloyd and that he has potential. But even if the Jacobs issue goes away and he isn't suspended, Joe Mixon or Najee Harris, if healthy and at the right price, solidifies your RB depth. Let Lloyd and Brooks battle for that #3 spot.

I only said it in that fashion because their opinion of need is clearly different than most of us.

I don't necessarily disagree entirely with the hold serve and see what we have in TC and then maybe even PS....watch closely cuts...but also see if Brooks has grown into more maybe (he's legit incredible 3rd down back but very low run threat), if Pierre Strong or Martinez have made jumps...if any of those three have and Lloyd is heathy I'm not worried. Issue is if Martinez and Strong continue to appear to be PS guys and Brooks hasn't changed I 1000000% am not comfortable with the room.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I only said it in that fashion because their opinion of need is clearly different than most of us.

I don't necessarily disagree entirely with the hold serve and see what we have in TC and then maybe even PS....watch closely cuts...but also see if Brooks has grown into more maybe (he's legit incredible 3rd down back but very low run threat), if Pierre Strong or Martinez have made jumps...if any of those three have and Lloyd is heathy I'm not worried. Issue is if Martinez and Strong continue to appear to be PS guys and Brooks hasn't changed I 1000000% am not comfortable with the room.

I'm not as high on Chris Brooks as some are. He is JAG to me and can be replaced with just about any other teams cuts or PS players. His one advantage over those guys is that he is now in his 3rd year with Love and the Packer playbook. That is very important to me, especially at RB. But that also maybe why I think sooner is better than later. If you bring a guy in now, he has more time to learn the playbook and get reps in with the offense.

I also don't like the lack of experience after Jacobs. Lloyd has 6 NFL carries and Brooks has 82.

 

[OldSchool101]

And 85% ish of that number is Gary and Clark being traded. Not void years.

Each player could have e had void years, but it didn’t matter. Once the player leaves the team, the pending cap charges are due.

Yes. That’s the part that is easy to forget. Prorating Signing Bonus’ is only advantageous until the player is no longer on the team, then it accelerates onto today’s Cap ledger for the original contracting team.
Voids are especially helpful when
A. You’re internal projection is to heavily in favor of keeping said player through most or all of those void intervals.
B. The Player stays put. Just as a savings account loses value if it doesn’t pay interest (due to the spending power decreasing through inflation). Also the players contract loses steam towards the Cap as each year they raise the team Cap thresholds.

I always like to say a $10Mil yearly player’s contract today loses whatever the % Cap increase the league decides each season, but it’s also compounding. This by spreading it across 5 years is significant. An investment gaining 15% compounding annually is doubling every 5 years. Meaning if the league increased the Cap % (for demonstration purposes) by 15% annual? The contract would really be closer to 50% of today’s feel because it’s not all applied today. Obviously that % is smaller and the voids are smaller (not equal portions of entire guaranteed). A $40mil contract with 50% guaranteed and turned to a signing bonus and spread $each season ($4mil voids) I bet has the effect of around a 66-75% of the original when all is said and done.

 

[tynimiller]

I'm not as high on Chris Brooks as some are. He is JAG to me and can be replaced with just about any other teams cuts or PS players. His one advantage over those guys is that he is now in his 3rd year with Love and the Packer playbook. That is very important to me, especially at RB. But that also maybe why I think sooner is better than later. If you bring a guy in now, he has more time to learn the playbook and get reps in with the offense.

I also don't like the lack of experience after Jacobs. Lloyd has 6 NFL carries and Brooks has 82.

Absolutely disagree that his only advantage is his 3rd year. His main advantage is the fact not a single Packer on the team is a better blocker out of the backfield than him...if I was in charge of making his madden ratings the dude is borderline pedestrian in everything except blocking skills....dude is ELITE level there. That alone keeps him as a rosterable player in the NFL.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Absolutely disagree that his only advantage is his 3rd year. His main advantage is the fact not a single Packer on the team is a better blocker out of the backfield than him...if I was in charge of making his madden ratings the dude is borderline pedestrian in everything except blocking skills....dude is ELITE level there. That alone keeps him as a rosterable player in the NFL.

Fair enough. I was only thinking about running and catching the ball.

 

[tynimiller]

Fair enough. I was only thinking about running and catching the ball.

We both on the same page though if Gute signed a veteran runnig back or low draft pick traded for one sounds like we'd both embrace most likely.