Earl Thomas

[PackerDNA]

A lot of talk heating up about Earl with his 'pay me or trade me' ultimatum to Seattle. The Packers are mentioned among the possible trade partners. Would you want him and at what cost? What says the board?

 

[Poppa San]

Would I want him? Sure. Could we use him? Sure. Will he be worth the price is the question. I say no.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

A lot of talk heating up about Earl with his 'pay me or trade me' ultimatum to Seattle. The Packers are mentioned among the possible trade partners. Would you want him and at what cost? What says the board?

Earl Thomas would definitely present a significant upgrade over whoever the Packers plan to line up at free safety. With the team only having $10.8 million of cap space it's all but guaranteed he won't end up in green and gold though.

 

[Mondio]

I have to believe the Packers are mentioned only because of a perceived need at safety and having some ties with front office and past trades. guys that know each other tend to do more business with each other sort of thing. But if the Seahawks aren't paying him, GB probably isn't either so what do we gain by trading for him? I certainly wouldn't mind seeing back there lined up for us, but it's always about money.

 

[PackerDNA]

I have to believe the Packers are mentioned only because of a perceived need at safety and having some ties with front office and past trades. guys that know each other tend to do more business with each other sort of thing.

Nail on the head, Mondio. Those are the two reasons why the Packers are on the list.

 

[PackerDNA]

I think a large signing bonus would make the cost manageable for the first two years.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think a large signing bonus would make the cost manageable for the first two years.

If the Packers trade for Thomas he would immediately count $8.5 million towards the cap. While Gutekunst might be able to sign him to a long-term extension reducing the cap hit for this season there's no guarantee it would work out that way, possibly forcing the team to clear some cap space by releasing another veteran.

 

[PackerDNA]

If the Packers trade for Thomas he would immediately count $8.5 million towards the cap. While Gutekunst might be able to sign him to a long-term extension reducing the cap hit for this season there's no guarantee it would work out that way, possibly forcing the team to clear some cap space by releasing another veteran.

I feel all such details could be worked out before finalizing any deal.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I feel all such details could be worked out before finalizing any deal.

As far as I know the NFL doesn't allow sign-and-trade agreements like the NBA permits.

 

[PackerDNA]

As far as I know the NFL doesn't allow sign-and-trade agreements like the NBA permits.

Then something like an agreement with Thomas to be done immediately after the trade. Where there's a will there's a way.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Then something like an agreement with Thomas to be done immediately after the trade. Where there's a will there's a way.

I guess the Packers might be allowed to talk to Thomas if the Seahawks granted them permission. But even if Gutekunst could work out a long-term contract with him the cap hit wouldn't significantly decrease if a large signing bonus is part of it.

 

[mradtke66]

While true, you can't "sign then trade" in the NFL, you can work out language that allows the teams to void the trade if something does or does not happen.

Exactly how or what triggers you're allowed to use, I'm not sure. You can always play questionable pool and fail him on his physical if he doesn't sign. That'd invalidate the trade immediate.

 

[thequick12]

If the Packers trade for Thomas he would immediately count $8.5 million towards the cap. While Gutekunst might be able to sign him to a long-term extension reducing the cap hit for this season there's no guarantee it would work out that way, possibly forcing the team to clear some cap space by releasing another veteran.

So if the question becomes would you rather have Earl Thomas or Bryan bulaga at this point in their careers? What say you ?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So if the question becomes would you rather have Earl Thomas or Bryan bulaga at this point in their careers? What say you ?

I would definitely prefer Thomas over Bulaga but the Packers would have to find an adequate replacement being capable of protecting Rodgers' right side first before thinking about releasing Bulaga.

In addition the team wouldn't be able to sign Thomas for the cap hit they would save on cutting Bulaga ($4.7 million).

 

[thequick12]

Well presumably bulaga will start the season on pup meaning he'll miss at least the first 6 games anyways. So the way I see it they already better have someone capable. 4.7 in addition to the 10.8 they have currently would be 15.5. Assuming Thomas's cap hit stays the same at 8.5 that still leaves 7 million in cap space heading into the season. Only 3.8 less than right now. And they could lower that cap number if they choose. Then comes the fact that if you trade for and pay Earl thomas Clinton Dix is likely to be upset meaning maybe you move him in that trade or an additional trade. Freeing up another 6 million leaving the team with 13 million. Idk I definitely think there's ways to get it done and still have roughly 10 million in room to start the season. You could even keep bulaga and get rid of Dix and still have 8.3

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Well presumably bulaga will start the season on pup meaning he'll miss at least the first 6 games anyways. So the way I see it they already better have someone capable. 4.7 in addition to the 10.8 they have currently would be 15.5. Assuming Thomas's cap hit stays the same at 8.5 that still leaves 7 million in cap space heading into the season. Only 3.8 less than right now. And they could lower that cap number if they choose. Then comes the fact that if you trade for and pay Earl thomas Clinton Dix is likely to be upset meaning maybe you move him in that trade or an additional trade. Freeing up another 6 million leaving the team with 13 million. Idk I definitely think there's ways to get it done and still have roughly 10 million in room to start the season. You could even keep bulaga and get rid of Dix and still have 8.3

Actually trading for Thomas and releasing Bulaga would leave the Packers with less than $5 million of cap space as the current number doesn't include players #52 and #53 on the roster as well as the practice squad. While definitely possible to get through a season with it that would leave them with only minimal wiggle room for the redt of the year.

It might be tough to trade Clinton-Dix with his salary of $6 million being fully guaranteed. The Packers would still be on the hook for it by releasing him.

 

[thequick12]

Actually trading for Thomas and releasing Bulaga would leave the Packers with less than $5 million of cap space as the current number doesn't include players #52 and #53 on the roster as well as the practice squad. While definitely possible to get through a season with it that would leave them with only minimal wiggle room for the redt of the year.

It might be tough to trade Clinton-Dix with his salary of $6 million being fully guaranteed. The Packers would still be on the hook for it by releasing him.

If they trade Dix his new team doesn't take on his contract ? I get that if they release him they have 6 m in dead money but how can it be that if they trade him they are still on the hook for that 6m?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If they trade Dix his new team doesn't take on his contract ? I get that if they release him they have 6 m in dead money but how can it be that if they trade him they are still on the hook for that 6m?

My bad, already edited my previous post. I don't believe any team would be interested in trading for him with his base salary being fully guaranteed though.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I guess the Packers might be allowed to talk to Thomas if the Seahawks granted them permission. But even if Gutekunst could work out a long-term contract with him the cap hit wouldn't significantly decrease if a large signing bonus is part of it.

That should be right; permission granted could lead to a agreement in principle.

So, he's 29 years old. He's threatened to retire in the past. He's unhappy with his money.

How many years would anybody want to risk, if any? 3 maybe in a rewrite of 2018 or 2 in an extension? If he's not happy with $8.5 mil cash this season, what's he looking for? Quite a bit, I'd say. Signing bonus really doesn't work that well over such a short time span without clearing cap. I suppose we could send them Clinton-Dix and a 4th. rounder and pick up $6 mil in cap as a partial offset against whatever Thomas would cost.

The cap situation for 2019 isn't all that great either; a multi-year deal would bite into that as well.

I'm not seeing it, guys.

 

[HardRightEdge]

My bad, already edited my previous post. I don't believe any team would be interested in trading for him with his base salary being fully guaranteed though.

It would be guaranteed as of opening day regardless, right?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It would be guaranteed as of opening day regardless, right?

Clinton-Dix's salary is already fully guaranteed for 2018. If the Packers trade him during the regular season they would take a cap hit of $350K for each week that has been played at that point with the team acquiring him being on the hook for the rest of the season.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I suppose we could send them Clinton-Dix and a 4th. rounder and pick up $6 mil in cap as a partial offset against whatever Thomas would cost.

I doubt the Seahawks would be interested in Clinton-Dix in return with Boston and Vaccaro available in free agency.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Clinton-Dix's salary is already fully guaranteed for 2018. If the Packers trade him during the regular season they would take a cap hit of $350K for each week that has been played at that point with the team acquiring him being on the hook for the rest of the season.

You missed my point. C-D is vested. Even If his salary is not guaranteed now it will be by opening day. I don't see how it being fully guaranteed now makes much difference.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I doubt the Seahawks would be interested in Clinton-Dix in return with Boston and Vaccaro available in free agency.

Vaccaro's a bust and a SS to boot. Boston may be getting the Kaepernick / Reid blackball treatment. But most of all, I wasn't being all that serious.

If Seattle can't get a deal they like for Thomas, which would not be C-D in a contract year at $6 mil, they'll make him play out his contract. It isn't much different than keeping a player unhappy with playing under a franchise tag or 5th. year option. Atlanta just told Julio Jones, "no", and he has 3 years left to wallow in poverty with take home pay of $35.5 mil. Jones probably said, "hey, that's less than Davante Adams!" Tough.

 

[XPack]

**** long term..... It's time we looked at 1-3 years and shot for the SB. We need this.

I'd say go all out. If needed, I'm happy to trade Matthews for him. He's younger and will have better impact.