Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers in best shape for next three years (ESPN)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="vince" data-source="post: 615846" data-attributes="member: 10935"><p>I've taken the low contract guys into account. You can change the names but min. contracts are minimum contracts and you have to count 51. Some of those rookies (the high-round picks) will be more expensive than the 51 contracts I'm counting and some will be a $100,000 or so less but that won't change the picture. The med/high priced vets I've got already gone from the team, other than the guys I think should be re-signed like Daniels, Lacy, Bakh, Barrington, and Hyde.</p><p></p><p>Take a closer look and you might say Barrington won't be worth the $4 mil I projected, or Hyde the $6 mil, but those guys are lower than the $7 mil for Lacy, Bakh and Daniels - which may well be too conservative. With a rising cap and seeing a guy like House get $6 mil/yr. I don't see those guys signing for less than $7 mil/yr, but accelerating their cap hits probably puts their 2017 numbers in that neighborhood.</p><p></p><p>It's the $7 mil each for the aging Lang and Sitton that I don't think there'll be room for based on how I'd prioritize the guys who'll be hitting the market.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="vince, post: 615846, member: 10935"] I've taken the low contract guys into account. You can change the names but min. contracts are minimum contracts and you have to count 51. Some of those rookies (the high-round picks) will be more expensive than the 51 contracts I'm counting and some will be a $100,000 or so less but that won't change the picture. The med/high priced vets I've got already gone from the team, other than the guys I think should be re-signed like Daniels, Lacy, Bakh, Barrington, and Hyde. Take a closer look and you might say Barrington won't be worth the $4 mil I projected, or Hyde the $6 mil, but those guys are lower than the $7 mil for Lacy, Bakh and Daniels - which may well be too conservative. With a rising cap and seeing a guy like House get $6 mil/yr. I don't see those guys signing for less than $7 mil/yr, but accelerating their cap hits probably puts their 2017 numbers in that neighborhood. It's the $7 mil each for the aging Lang and Sitton that I don't think there'll be room for based on how I'd prioritize the guys who'll be hitting the market. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
XPack
Don Barclay
shockerx
tynimiller
Latest posts
Assessing the Draft Class (2024)
Latest: DoURant
19 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 Round 7, pick 245: Michael Pratt, QB
Latest: Thirteen Below
Today at 3:32 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: Thirteen Below
Today at 3:28 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Not too soon 2024 roster prediction
Latest: Sanguine camper
Today at 3:00 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 1:57 PM
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers in best shape for next three years (ESPN)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top