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="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 615983"><p>Let's try this again from a top down perspective. Start with the following link:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/green-bay-packers/" target="_blank">http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/green-bay-packers/</a></p><p></p><p>We see $136 mil in cap for the current top-51 roster. The top half of the list is well populated with veterans filling out the 31 starter, key rotational, key backup and special teams positions. There's an open position at part-time ILB and a spot or two in the D-Line rotation with the suspensions. Other than that, the snaps are nearly fully accounted for.</p><p></p><p>Now click on the 2017 tab in that link. The top-51 cap commitments currently on the books total $115 mil.</p><p></p><p>The top 10 shows 9 good-to-great players, paid accordingly. Check.</p><p></p><p>Now look at the rest. Linsley and Rodgers are there. OK. Other than those two guys, while discounting Janis' small handful of snaps and Goodson getting a couple of ST snaps, that's it. There are <strong>11 players</strong> in the 2017 list who have played NFL football to date.</p><p></p><p>So, who are the <strong>21 players</strong> missing in that 2017 list among the <strong>current top 32</strong> in achieving that <strong>$21 mil in lower cap</strong>? Here are the missing names:</p><p></p><p>Offense:</p><p></p><p>Lacy</p><p>Sitton</p><p>Lang</p><p>Bakhtiari</p><p>Tolzien</p><p>Quarless</p><p>Kuhn</p><p></p><p>Defense:</p><p></p><p>Peppers</p><p>Daniels</p><p>Raji</p><p>Guion</p><p>Boyd</p><p>D. Jones</p><p>Barrington</p><p>Perry</p><p>Neal</p><p>Hayward</p><p>Hyde</p><p></p><p>Special Teams:</p><p></p><p>Crosby</p><p>Masthay</p><p>Richardson</p><p>Hyde (again)</p><p></p><p>It's easy to pick out any <strong>one</strong> of these guys as departures and think the impact is manageable. But we're looking at the collective affect. Setting aside the cap carryover and cap increases for the moment, which roster represents the better <strong>value proposition</strong> in light of the <strong>$21 mil cap differential</strong>?</p><p></p><p>The answer is, "it's not even close".</p><p></p><p>I substantially discount the projected $20 million cap increase by 2017. Every team gets that, resulting in salary inflation. There might be a few million per year value gain by 2017 as a result of early signings. but it will not be substantial. Players and agents have visibility into the future cap; they want a piece of that built into 3-4-5 year contract extensions.</p><p></p><p>Then there's the cap carryover. The current $15 mil drops to $13 mil once 52, 53 and the PS are signed. Then IR has to be accounted for. Assuming a conservative average of 4 players per week in-season on IR, with those 4 guys replaced by minimum salary guys, that takes the carryover down to $9 mil.</p><p></p><p>Jump to 2016 (click the link tab for that year). Current cap commitments for that year are $130 mil, which goes to a minimum $137 mil after filling out the 52, 53 and PS, $3 mil for the signing of the top draft picks, and $2 mil held for IR replacements against a projected $150 + $9 = $159 mil in cap space.</p><p></p><p>That seems fat, doesn't it...$22 mil in free cap to work with between now and 2016 post-draft with the whole offense signed for that year. Let's say Thompson/Ball use all of it post-2015 for Daniels and some key extensions. That might buy Daniels and some marginally discounted Sitton, Lang and Lacy extensions under optimal conditions with very "cap friendly" deferrals via signing bonuses. Consider the fact that <strong>Tramon Williams and Devon House represent $13 mil in cap hits </strong>this season with their new teams. $24 mil doesn't go all that far. And those cap hits for those players carry forward as subtractions from the illusory 2017 cap space we seen now.</p><p></p><p>So, going into 2017, the cap carryover "war chest" shrinks to zero with a small handful of 4 key signings under a favorable scenario.</p><p></p><p>Where are the other 17 of the top 32 players supposed to come from, including a Peppers replacement in particular? Draft (or sign as UDFAs) and develop, I'm told.</p><p></p><p>So the question becomes, how may rookies from 2013 have ascended to the top 32 in 2015?</p><p></p><p>Lacy, Clinton-Dix, Hyde, Barrington, Linsley, Bakhtiari, Adams, R. Rodgers. Throw in Tolzien even if he wasn't a rookie in 2013. That's it...half of the pace of what will be needed to stand still.</p><p></p><p>There are three problems leading up to 2017 that have not been present in the 2-year outlook in recent years:</p><p></p><p>1) If you look at the proven top 9 players in the 2017 cap list, they were core players in 2013 except for Peppers and Adams, with Peppers bringing his own fresh 3-year cap hit starting in 2014. What those players are being paid now is substantially more than what they were paid in 2013. In other words, the Packers are paying a lot more money for the same players, plus what Peppers is getting paid out of the war chest who will need to be replaced, sucking up a decent portion of the cap expansion from 2013 to 2017. That compounds the salary inflation hit to cap expansion.</p><p></p><p>2) The youth pipeline is not that strong. We were thrilled to see Clinton-Dix, Linsley and Adams assuming starting positions out of the 2014 draft. Well, 17 players are needed to fill out the top 32 in 2017 once the war chest is expended on the aforementioned 4 core players, with all of the most promising youth from the 2014 and prior drafts already accounted for. And the bottom-of-the-roster players who might emerge are not going to get many snaps in 2015 barring injuries to even evaluate that pipeline. And it's not as though some of them didn't have an opportunity to bump some the 17 players in question...and didn't...by the end of 2014.</p><p></p><p>3) The Packers have been getting bad value on the defensive side of the ball, whether that's a matter of talent or coaching is another discussion. The 2014 and 2015 cap hits on the defensive side of the ball were and are greater than on the offensive side. For the money being paid to the defense, there should be better performance. Or less should have been paid and will be paid with cheaper players for the same performance.</p><p></p><p>THX calls my detailed 2-year outlook masterbatory. Instead he prefers his very own version of self-stroking in the following link, which I would deem superficial and, quite frankly, "failing to get off":</p><p></p><p><a href="http://packersnotes.com/2015/06/packers-hoarding-money-for-2017/" target="_blank">http://packersnotes.com/2015/06/packers-hoarding-money-for-2017/</a></p><p></p><p>I really don't care to hear any responses to this post unless there is some concomitant attention to detail in rebuttal.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 615983"] Let's try this again from a top down perspective. Start with the following link: [URL]http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/green-bay-packers/[/URL] We see $136 mil in cap for the current top-51 roster. The top half of the list is well populated with veterans filling out the 31 starter, key rotational, key backup and special teams positions. There's an open position at part-time ILB and a spot or two in the D-Line rotation with the suspensions. Other than that, the snaps are nearly fully accounted for. Now click on the 2017 tab in that link. The top-51 cap commitments currently on the books total $115 mil. The top 10 shows 9 good-to-great players, paid accordingly. Check. Now look at the rest. Linsley and Rodgers are there. OK. Other than those two guys, while discounting Janis' small handful of snaps and Goodson getting a couple of ST snaps, that's it. There are [B]11 players[/B] in the 2017 list who have played NFL football to date. So, who are the [B]21 players[/B] missing in that 2017 list among the [B]current top 32[/B] in achieving that [B]$21 mil in lower cap[/B]? Here are the missing names: Offense: Lacy Sitton Lang Bakhtiari Tolzien Quarless Kuhn Defense: Peppers Daniels Raji Guion Boyd D. Jones Barrington Perry Neal Hayward Hyde Special Teams: Crosby Masthay Richardson Hyde (again) It's easy to pick out any [B]one[/B] of these guys as departures and think the impact is manageable. But we're looking at the collective affect. Setting aside the cap carryover and cap increases for the moment, which roster represents the better [B]value proposition[/B] in light of the [B]$21 mil cap differential[/B]? The answer is, "it's not even close". I substantially discount the projected $20 million cap increase by 2017. Every team gets that, resulting in salary inflation. There might be a few million per year value gain by 2017 as a result of early signings. but it will not be substantial. Players and agents have visibility into the future cap; they want a piece of that built into 3-4-5 year contract extensions. Then there's the cap carryover. The current $15 mil drops to $13 mil once 52, 53 and the PS are signed. Then IR has to be accounted for. Assuming a conservative average of 4 players per week in-season on IR, with those 4 guys replaced by minimum salary guys, that takes the carryover down to $9 mil. Jump to 2016 (click the link tab for that year). Current cap commitments for that year are $130 mil, which goes to a minimum $137 mil after filling out the 52, 53 and PS, $3 mil for the signing of the top draft picks, and $2 mil held for IR replacements against a projected $150 + $9 = $159 mil in cap space. That seems fat, doesn't it...$22 mil in free cap to work with between now and 2016 post-draft with the whole offense signed for that year. Let's say Thompson/Ball use all of it post-2015 for Daniels and some key extensions. That might buy Daniels and some marginally discounted Sitton, Lang and Lacy extensions under optimal conditions with very "cap friendly" deferrals via signing bonuses. Consider the fact that [B]Tramon Williams and Devon House represent $13 mil in cap hits [/B]this season with their new teams. $24 mil doesn't go all that far. And those cap hits for those players carry forward as subtractions from the illusory 2017 cap space we seen now. So, going into 2017, the cap carryover "war chest" shrinks to zero with a small handful of 4 key signings under a favorable scenario. Where are the other 17 of the top 32 players supposed to come from, including a Peppers replacement in particular? Draft (or sign as UDFAs) and develop, I'm told. So the question becomes, how may rookies from 2013 have ascended to the top 32 in 2015? Lacy, Clinton-Dix, Hyde, Barrington, Linsley, Bakhtiari, Adams, R. Rodgers. Throw in Tolzien even if he wasn't a rookie in 2013. That's it...half of the pace of what will be needed to stand still. There are three problems leading up to 2017 that have not been present in the 2-year outlook in recent years: 1) If you look at the proven top 9 players in the 2017 cap list, they were core players in 2013 except for Peppers and Adams, with Peppers bringing his own fresh 3-year cap hit starting in 2014. What those players are being paid now is substantially more than what they were paid in 2013. In other words, the Packers are paying a lot more money for the same players, plus what Peppers is getting paid out of the war chest who will need to be replaced, sucking up a decent portion of the cap expansion from 2013 to 2017. That compounds the salary inflation hit to cap expansion. 2) The youth pipeline is not that strong. We were thrilled to see Clinton-Dix, Linsley and Adams assuming starting positions out of the 2014 draft. Well, 17 players are needed to fill out the top 32 in 2017 once the war chest is expended on the aforementioned 4 core players, with all of the most promising youth from the 2014 and prior drafts already accounted for. And the bottom-of-the-roster players who might emerge are not going to get many snaps in 2015 barring injuries to even evaluate that pipeline. And it's not as though some of them didn't have an opportunity to bump some the 17 players in question...and didn't...by the end of 2014. 3) The Packers have been getting bad value on the defensive side of the ball, whether that's a matter of talent or coaching is another discussion. The 2014 and 2015 cap hits on the defensive side of the ball were and are greater than on the offensive side. For the money being paid to the defense, there should be better performance. Or less should have been paid and will be paid with cheaper players for the same performance. THX calls my detailed 2-year outlook masterbatory. Instead he prefers his very own version of self-stroking in the following link, which I would deem superficial and, quite frankly, "failing to get off": [URL]http://packersnotes.com/2015/06/packers-hoarding-money-for-2017/[/URL] I really don't care to hear any responses to this post unless there is some concomitant attention to detail in rebuttal. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
Most hated teams outside of the division
Latest: Thirteen Below
8 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 7, pick 245: Michael Pratt, QB
Latest: gopkrs
17 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 7, pick 255 (compensatory): Kalen King, CB
Latest: Dantés
44 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 6, pick 202: Travis Glover, OT
Latest: Dantés
51 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The 11th Annual Amish Draft Contest 2024
Latest: Thirteen Below
51 minutes ago
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