Future salary cap situation

[Carl]

There's no doubt Rodgers and Matthews had to be paid, the contracts should have been structured differently though.



It's hilarious that TT can't do anything wrong in some people's mind. This team is headed towards salary cap issues but some of you won't even consider questioning some of his moves when presented factual evidence.

Structured how? Paid 35 million now and be over the cap? They are paid just like the majority of big contracts.

You're not presenting with good evidence. The best you have is that in 3 years, they will have the 6th most cap room. That's going to change
significantly by then by the way.

You're essentially saying that because they have a couple big contracts, they'll be in cap trouble. It takes more than that to ruin a cap.

Here's evidence. The fact is that the team under TT has had zero cap issues. None at all. TT always has the cap in mind. I'm not saying he won't restructure contracts, but they'll be fine cap wise like always.





Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Structured how? Paid 35 million now and be over the cap? They are paid just like the majority of big contracts.

The cap hit of the contracts shouldn 't have been backloaded. I don´t care about the big contracts other teams hand out, structuring contracts like that will lead to cap issues at some point. Especially after doing the same with Shields and Peppers contracts this offseason.

You're not presenting with good evidence. The best you have is that in 3 years, they will have the 6th most cap room. That's going to change significantly by then by the way.

Taking a look at the Packers will cap situation for 2015 (they are 10th in the league in cap space committed toward 2015) it will be tough to re-sign both Nelson and Cobb as well as Bulaga. So I don´t think the issues I´m talking about won´t occur until 2017. In addition I would like to know how you think the cap situation will significantly improve for the Packers over the next three years.

You're essentially saying that because they have a couple big contracts, they'll be in cap trouble. It takes more than that to ruin a cap.

No, I´m saying they´ll be in cap trouble because of the way the team structured some contracts as well as overpaid for some guys.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Well, the only thing aside from restructuring a contract (in which case the player has to agree to it) TT can do is releasing players to save some cap room. That doesn´t make the team better in most cases though.

Well, @gatorpack, as you rated the above post as old, is there any other way you know of how to save cap space???

 

[NOMOFO]

Well, @gatorpack, as you rated the above post as old, is there any other way you know of how to save cap space???

This is really beyond comical. Thompson doesn't hand out giant contracts and haters complain. He signs a few giant contracts and haters complain. He doesn't sign any free agents and haters complain. He signs free agents and haters complain. See a pattern here? Give it a rest.

 

[JBlood]

I'm one of those who's head is stuck in the sand over salary issues, preferring to watch the games. The money is bringing down the NFL--like most things--but at least the league is structured in such a way that a Green Bay market can enjoy a slow death just as equally as a market in New York. And Green Bay under TT's direction seems to be doing just fine.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

This is really beyond comical. Thompson doesn't hand out giant contracts and haters complain. He signs a few giant contracts and haters complain. He doesn't sign any free agents and haters complain. He signs free agents and haters complain. See a pattern here? Give it a rest.

It´s just impossible to lead a normal discussion with you. The reason I started this thread was not to complain about TT but to illustrate that the Packers don´t have as much cap space over the next few seasons as some of you might expect. There´s no denying though that the structure of the contracts handed out to Rodgers, Matthews, Shields and Peppers will lead to issues with the cap in later years, I don´t think any rational person would argue with that.

It is really ridiculous that you play the TT hater card every time someone doesn´t agree with a move by him. It seems to me that you´re more of a Ted Thompson than a Packers fan as it is pretty obvious that you can´t accept he makes mistakes as well.

And BTW, as you chose to quote my post about possibilites to save some cap space, are there any others than restructuring a contract or releasing a player???

 

[NOMOFO]

I'm one of those who's head is stuck in the sand over salary issues, preferring to watch the games. The money is bringing down the NFL--like most things--but at least the league is structured in such a way that a Green Bay market can enjoy a slow death just as equally as a market in New York. And Green Bay under TT's direction seems to be doing just fine.

Very well stated. Until proven his approach is proven "wrong" over the course of a few years...Ted's approach is proven "right". This cherry picking of small little samples of time serves no purpose. I mean, for God's sake, we need to keep a close eye on what Packers we never even knew were on the roster just got cut!

 

[thisisnate]

Team under a GM that has never had anything resembling cap problems and is currently not in a dire cap situation. Why is this even a thread? We'll be fine.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm one of those who's head is stuck in the sand over salary issues, preferring to watch the games. The money is bringing down the NFL--like most things--but at least the league is structured in such a way that a Green Bay market can enjoy a slow death just as equally as a market in New York. And Green Bay under TT's direction seems to be doing just fine.

Team under a GM that has never had anything resembling cap problems and is currently not in a dire cap situation. Why is this even a thread? We'll be fine.

I agree that it has worked pretty fine over the last few season. You have to realize though that the Packers two best players didn´t count a lot vs. the cap over that period as Rodgers was signed to a bargain deal during the 2008 season, Matthews was on his rookie contract and because of the structure of the deal didn´t have a huge cap hit last year.

That will change starting with this season though and from now on overpaying for guys like he did with Burnett and Jones last season and possibly did with Shields and Peppers this offseason will result in issues with the cap in the future.

 

[TJV]

Certainly Thompson, like all of us, makes mistakes and I think knee-jerk reactions that imply he shouldn’t be questioned are as bad as thinking one player is the franchise. A critical part of my enjoyment of this board is the honest questioning of what the organization is doing, even though Thompson, McCarthy, Ball etc. are professionals and we are not regarding the NFL. However, IMO it is important to distinguish between mistakes of player evaluation vs. managing the cap. Thompson and every other GM in the league has, and will continue to make mistakes of evaluating draftees, UDFAs, UFAs, and in retaining or re-signing players on their teams. Imperfect human beings evaluating other imperfect human beings are bound to lead to mistakes. Particularly when the evaluation many times entails projecting how players will perform in new circumstances.

But managing the salary cap is an entirely different matter. Once one understands it thoroughly, it’s math and mathematics at this level is objective. The unknowns in the equation are how much the cap will increase over the next few seasons and, back to the subjective, how valuable – or not – the players on the team remain. Thompson hasn’t just managed the cap well over the past few seasons. He took over an aging team on the verge of cap trouble and corrected it with remarkable speed. And the Packers haven’t had cap problems since. So I understand those giving Thompson the benefit of the doubt in this regard.

But circumstances have certainly changed with the contracts of Rodgers, Matthews, and Shields along with extensions for Nelson and Cobb and that’s reason enough to express a concern about the cap situation going forward. Another change is the ability of teams to carryover unused cap dollars along with minimum spending requirements. I was surprised more current cap space wasn’t used in the Shields and Peppers deals but I think the ability to carryover unused space has something to do with that.

As far as evaluating Thompson’s handling of the future cap situation I am not overly concerned about it because:
1) He’s handled the cap so well to date, which is evidence backing up his words that he believes managing the cap is a priority.
2) He is privy to information we are not. For example, how expendable does he and the entire organization view all the players on the roster? And how do they project each player’s value going forward?
3) I’m confident he and Russ Ball have spreadsheets projecting a myriad of combinations of players becoming injured or ineffective, etc. - contingency plans regarding the future cap hits of the players they view as most important to the team going forward as well as likely future cap limits. They have a much better idea of which players they view as expendable as well as which contracts could be restructured and how. I believe that because I would be doing that at a minimum and they certainly know more about it than I.
4) Managing the cap is easier than evaluating personnel because it is at least somewhat more objective.

But my confidence in Thompson handling the cap going forward doesn’t mean he won’t make mistakes or that he shouldn’t be challenged/questioned about it.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Thompson hasn’t just managed the cap well over the past few seasons. He took over an aging team on the verge of cap trouble and corrected it with remarkable speed. And the Packers haven’t had cap problems since. So I understand those giving Thompson the benefit of the doubt in this regard.

Absolutely agree with the fact that he has managed the cap well over the last few seasons, taking a look at the numbers over the next few seasons I´m concerned though that there will be issues regarding the cap.

But circumstances have certainly changed with the contracts of Rodgers, Matthews, and Shields along with extensions for Nelson and Cobb and that’s reason enough to express a concern about the cap situation going forward. Another change is the ability of teams to carryover unused cap dollars along with minimum spending requirements. I was surprised more current cap space wasn’t used in the Shields and Peppers deals but I think the ability to carryover unused space has something to do with that.

I was actually very surprised that the Packers didn´t use more cap space in the first year of Rodgers and Matthews extension in 2013 which on one side resulted in the team being able to roll over more money into 2014 but on the other side means their cap hits will be higer over the rest of the deal. As I posted earlier I don´t think the team will be able to roll over a lot of money into 2015 and with the guys already under contract for that season it will be really tough to re-sign Nelson, Cobb and Bulaga and still remain some flexibility with the cap.

 

[TeamTundra]

There´s a lot of talk about the Packers being in great shape concerning the cap space in future years, but taking a look at the numbers this isn´t actually true at all.

While the team still possesses the 9th most cap space for the 2014 season and some of it might be rolled over into 2015 they have already invested more than $118 million (10th most in the league) in cap space for the 2015 season with Jordy Nelson, Randall Cobb and Bryan Bulaga on the verge of becoming unrestricted free agents. Compared to that, teams a lot of people assume being in cap hell have less invested for 2015 with the 49ers at $110 million, the Broncos at $96 million and the Seahawks at $90 million..............

A closer look at the 49ers and Seahawks' rosters reveal they have several key players with expiring contracts either at the end of this year or the following year. 49ers have Kaepernick, Crabtree, Aldon Smith, Iupati, Gore, Dorsey, V. Davis, C. Culliver, K. Hunter, J. Smith, R. McDonald, with expiring contracts. Seahawks have C. Avril, R. Sherman, E. Thomas, R. Wilson, M. Lynch, R. Okung, B Wagner, J. Kearse, B. Irvin, D. Baldwin, etc. Some big names on that list and some of the contracts - Wilson, Kaepernick, R. Sherman, E. Thomas, Crabtree, A. Smith, etc. will probably be in the $60 - $100+ million plus range.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

A closer look at the 49ers and Seahawks' rosters reveal they have several key players with expiring contracts either at the end of this year or the following year. 49ers have Kaepernick, Crabtree, Aldon Smith, Iupati, Gore, Dorsey, V. Davis, C. Culliver, K. Hunter, J. Smith, R. McDonald, with expiring contracts. Seahawks have C. Avril, R. Sherman, E. Thomas, R. Wilson, M. Lynch, R. Okung, B Wagner, J. Kearse, B. Irvin, D. Baldwin, etc. Some big names on that list and some of the contracts - Wilson, Kaepernick, R. Sherman, E. Thomas, Crabtree, A. Smith, etc. will probably be in the $60 - $100+ million plus range.

I agree that both of these teams will have some tough decisions to make, but the Seahawks will have a huge amount of cap room to work with. In the Niners case I will take a close look at their draft this year as I think there´s a real chance they´ll let Kaepernick walk away afer this season.

 

[NOMOFO]

Certainly Thompson, like all of us, makes mistakes and I think knee-jerk reactions that imply he shouldn’t be questioned are as bad as thinking one player is the franchise. A critical part of my enjoyment of this board is the honest questioning of what the organization is doing, even though Thompson, McCarthy, Ball etc. are professionals and we are not regarding the NFL. However, IMO it is important to distinguish between mistakes of player evaluation vs. managing the cap. Thompson and every other GM in the league has, and will continue to make mistakes of evaluating draftees, UDFAs, UFAs, and in retaining or re-signing players on their teams. Imperfect human beings evaluating other imperfect human beings are bound to lead to mistakes. Particularly when the evaluation many times entails projecting how players will perform in new circumstances.

But managing the salary cap is an entirely different matter. Once one understands it thoroughly, it’s math and mathematics at this level is objective. The unknowns in the equation are how much the cap will increase over the next few seasons and, back to the subjective, how valuable – or not – the players on the team remain. Thompson hasn’t just managed the cap well over the past few seasons. He took over an aging team on the verge of cap trouble and corrected it with remarkable speed. And the Packers haven’t had cap problems since. So I understand those giving Thompson the benefit of the doubt in this regard.

But circumstances have certainly changed with the contracts of Rodgers, Matthews, and Shields along with extensions for Nelson and Cobb and that’s reason enough to express a concern about the cap situation going forward. Another change is the ability of teams to carryover unused cap dollars along with minimum spending requirements. I was surprised more current cap space wasn’t used in the Shields and Peppers deals but I think the ability to carryover unused space has something to do with that.

As far as evaluating Thompson’s handling of the future cap situation I am not overly concerned about it because:
1) He’s handled the cap so well to date, which is evidence backing up his words that he believes managing the cap is a priority.
2) He is privy to information we are not. For example, how expendable does he and the entire organization view all the players on the roster? And how do they project each player’s value going forward?
3) I’m confident he and Russ Ball have spreadsheets projecting a myriad of combinations of players becoming injured or ineffective, etc. - contingency plans regarding the future cap hits of the players they view as most important to the team going forward as well as likely future cap limits. They have a much better idea of which players they view as expendable as well as which contracts could be restructured and how. I believe that because I would be doing that at a minimum and they certainly know more about it than I.
4) Managing the cap is easier than evaluating personnel because it is at least somewhat more objective.

But my confidence in Thompson handling the cap going forward doesn’t mean he won’t make mistakes or that he shouldn’t be challenged/questioned about it.

Agreed... it's fine to question him and none of us have ever said he's perfect. It's just that for me, there are about 100 other things I'm more "concerned with" than thinking Ted Thompson may have slipped up on something. I also don't think I'm going too far out on a limb by saying it appears that some Packer fans continually try awfully hard to find fault in Ted.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Agreed... it's fine to question him and none of us have ever said he's perfect.

Maybe you never said TT is perfect, but as soon as someone else criticizes him you personally attack the poster and play the Thompson hater card.

It's just that for me, there are about 100 other things I'm more "concerned with" than thinking Ted Thompson may have slipped up on something.

It´s absolutely fine if you´re not interested in a specific topic. If that´s the case ignore it, move on and don´t ruin it for others who might be interested in it by unloading your BS in the thread.

 

[NOMOFO]

Maybe you never said TT is perfect, but as soon as someone else criticizes him you personally attack the poster and play the Thompson hater card.



It´s absolutely fine if you´re not interested in a specific topic. If that´s the case ignore it, move on and don´t ruin it for others who might be interested in it by unloading your BS in the thread.

Well, you may be right...but... maybe if you would spend less time responding to these posts and more time keeping up with Packer's news, we would know by now what the official color of Packer ****** cakes will be for 2014. ...and I wouldn't mind at least SOME information on who might be cut next from the list of players we never heard of. Is that too much to ask?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And I wouldn't mind at least SOME information on who might be cut next from the list of players we never heard of. Is that too much to ask?

Maybe it´s time you start questioning TT as well as he put the guy you never heard of (Cunningham) on injured reserve instead of agreeing on an injury settlement, costing the team nearly $300K in cap space although he never played a single down for the team.

 

[gatorpack]

Well, @gatorpack, as you rated the above post as old, is there any other way you know of how to save cap space???

The packers are fine relax.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The packers are fine relax.

The numbers I posted in the original post of the thread suggest though that the Packers cap situation isn´t as good as some of you might think. I don´t understand how anybody could argue with that after taking a look at the stats. Just because TT has managed the cap pretty well over the last few seasons doesn´t mean the cap situation in the future looks bright as well.

 

[clown133]

To captainWIMM, I think you raise a valid point. However, I don't think it's necessarily a bad problem to have. TT's drafting/signing brought us Rodgers, Nelson, Cobb, Matthews and Shields. These are the players you're most concerned about; would you rather have a roster without these guys? Yes, their contracts are backloaded, but that's the norm for talented, high-profile athletes. They deserve to be paid. TT's and Co.'s job is to figure out how to assemble the best roster around these core players. I'd rather keep those players in house than let them go and pin our hopes on ridiculously good drafting. How many more times are they going to be able to pull high-impact guys like Nelson, Cobb, Matthews, Raji and Shields (undrafted) out of the draft in a three year period? Not to mention Rodgers... Aren't we trying to draft these kinds of guys and KEEP them?

As far as Peppers is concerned, I don't necessarily agree with the signing but I believe it's a low-risk high-reward move. He can be cut if it doesn't look like he'll perform during the 2015-2016 season, which is when he becomes a salary cap burden. His talent alone is easily worth the $3.5 million cap hit this year. Speaking of cuts, I also believe Shields is a guy that won't be retained for the full length of his contract to free up more cap room. I don't think his current talents deserve $12 million a year, which is what he's due to earn during the last two years of the contract. However, the contract spans what should be his prime years, and a jump in production could make the contract well-deserved.

 

[Carl]

The numbers I posted in the original post of the thread suggest though that the Packers cap situation isn´t as good as some of you might think. I don´t understand how anybody could argue with that after taking a look at the stats. Just because TT has managed the cap pretty well over the last few seasons doesn´t mean the cap situation in the future looks bright as well.

I can certainly argue after looking at the stats.

$55 million (6th in the league) for only four players in 2017.
The cap is projected to be $160 million by 2016. Say it stays at that for 2017. $55 million is about 34% of the cap. Currently, they have about $44 million in their top four guys or 33% of the cap. Not a big increase.

$118 million (10th most in the league) in cap space for the 2015 season
At the beginning of free agency this year, they had 74.4% of the cap used up. The cap for next year is projected to be $140-145 million. The $118 million would be 81-84% used. An increase, but still leaves plenty of room with $22 to 27 million available.

$86 million towards the cap in 2016
The $86 million includes the cap impact of 18 players. Currently, the top 18 players take up more, with about $95 million dollars.

Plus, TT will keep filling the roster with more cheap, young players than expensive veterans, while many other teams will use free agency much more. Therefore, their projected money used compared to the rest of league will improve.

Yes, Cobb and Nelson need some big deals, but with the cap increases, looks like they have room.

 

[Carl]

Maybe it´s time you start questioning TT as well as he put the guy you never heard of (Cunningham) on injured reserve instead of agreeing on an injury settlement, costing the team nearly $300K in cap space although he never played a single down for the team.

300K in dead money? How will they afford anybody???

It's also very possible TT thought Cunningham could help the team after healing on IR.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

To captainWIMM, I think you raise a valid point. However, I don't think it's necessarily a bad problem to have. TT's drafting/signing brought us Rodgers, Nelson, Cobb, Matthews and Shields. These are the players you're most concerned about; would you rather have a roster without these guys? Yes, their contracts are backloaded, but that's the norm for talented, high-profile athletes. They deserve to be paid. TT's and Co.'s job is to figure out how to assemble the best roster around these core players. I'd rather keep those players in house than let them go and pin our hopes on ridiculously good drafting. How many more times are they going to be able to pull high-impact guys like Nelson, Cobb, Matthews, Raji and Shields (undrafted) out of the draft in a three year period? Not to mention Rodgers... Aren't we trying to draft these kinds of guys and KEEP them?

I totally agree with the Packers re-signing all of the guys you mentioned, it´s the structure of the contracts I don´t like. I don´t care if other teams do it the same way as well, backloading nearly every single high-priced contract will lead to cap issues at some point.

As far as Peppers is concerned, I don't necessarily agree with the signing but I believe it's a low-risk high-reward move. He can be cut if it doesn't look like he'll perform during the 2015-2016 season, which is when he becomes a salary cap burden. His talent alone is easily worth the $3.5 million cap hit this year. Speaking of cuts, I also believe Shields is a guy that won't be retained for the full length of his contract to free up more cap room. I don't think his current talents deserve $12 million a year, which is what he's due to earn during the last two years of the contract. However, the contract spans what should be his prime years, and a jump in production could make the contract well-deserved.

Once again, I agree that Peppers and Shields would be highly overpaid once their cap hits increase significantly. But, by backloading the cap hit with paying those guys a significant signing bonus at the time they signed the contract releasing them at some point during the contract would result in a huge amount of dead money counting against the cap. Peppers would result in a $5 million dead money cap hit in 2015, Shields $6.25 million in 2016 if he would be released after two years of his contract.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I can certainly argue after looking at the stats.

$55 million (6th in the league) for only four players in 2017.
The cap is projected to be $160 million by 2016. Say it stays at that for 2017. $55 million is about 34% of the cap. Currently, they have about $44 million in their top four guys or 33% of the cap. Not a big increase.

Burnett won´t have the fourth highest cap hit on the team once the 2017 offseason starts, maybe even Shields won´t be in top 4 at the point, so the percentage number will go up.

$118 million (10th most in the league) in cap space for the 2015 season

At the beginning of free agency this year, they had 74.4% of the cap used up. The cap for next year is projected to be $140-145 million. The $118 million would be 81-84% used. An increase, but still leaves plenty of room with $22 to 27 million available.

IMO that´s a significant increase and you assume that the Packers don´t sign anyone until March 2015 to a long-term deal. In addition, while Shields was the only guy becoming an UFA this offseason demanding a huge contract, Nelson and Cobb aren´t signed for next season, with Bulaga being another possible UFA asking for a lot of money. Those two or three guys will at least ask for another 10% of the cap in 2015, leaving the Packers with little to no room to work with.

$86 million towards the cap in 2016

The $86 million includes the cap impact of 18 players. Currently, the top 18 players take up more, with about $95 million dollars.

Plus, TT will keep filling the roster with more cheap, young players than expensive veterans, while many other teams will use free agency much more. Therefore, their projected money used compared to the rest of league will improve.

Yes, Cobb and Nelson need some big deals, but with the cap increases, looks like they have room.

Taking a look at the top 18 players for the 2016 season doesn´t make a lot of sense, as Datone Jones´, whose cap hit would rank 7th at the moment for 2016, would result in only the 16th highest on this year´s squad and Eddie Lacy´s wouldn´t even be in the top 18 anymore. I think it´s fair to assume that only the guys currently in the top 6 for 2016 will be in the top 18 by the time this season rolls around.

Comparing the top 6 of this season to the one in 2016 (which won´t be the top 6 at that time) tells a different story than you might suggest though. Right now, the top 6 guys account for approximately 45% of the cap, while the guys currently in the top 6 for 2016 already make up 50% of it (assuming the cap will increase to $150 million for that season). Once again, this number will increase because of the contracts that hopefully will be handed out to Nelson, Cobb and possible to Hayward and Daniels.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

300K in dead money? How will they afford anybody???

It's also very possible TT thought Cunningham could help the team after healing on IR.

I agree, that post wasn´t about complaining about the cap hit Cunningham accounted for last season, but in response to NOMOFO making fun of me for posting that he was released by the Packers as he didn´t know the guy was on the roster.