Packers sign Guion to 3 year deal

[Pokerbrat2000]

Ryan04, captainWIMM's link is a better breakdown of Guion's contract:IMO this is a very good deal for the Packers.

I agree, these are the kinds of contracts you hope for when you are signing a player with a history like Guion's. I would like to see BJ back as well, but only if the contract is an incentive based one. He doesn't have any off the field things (that we know of), but his on the field play has been erratic enough during his career, that guaranteed big $$'s wouldn't be a wise move IMO.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

IMO this is a very good deal for the Packers.

I like the structure of the deal as well but still think it's too much for Guion.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I like the structure of the deal as well but still think it's too much for Guion.

There is a point buried in there.

Sure, Thompson looks smart if Guion gets hurt or suspended again. Avoiding wasted cap is a positive but it is not the primary objective. Winning depends upon building a roster that on balance plays above their contracts. Risk avoidance only takes you so far.

Now that the risk avoidance details are out of the way, the question before the court should be:

Is Guion worth a $3.5 mil cap hit in 2016 as a player on the roster for 16 games? I believe he is if the 2014 version takes the field.

As an aside, all reports indicate that pot smoking is widespread in the NFL. Unless a guy is already in the program, there's no testing for it between training camp and the end of the season. Most players are smart about it. Guion's sin, by NFL standards, is not that he smoked pot, possibly in large quantities, but that he was stupid enough to get caught with a load of it. I suspect he learned his lesson.

 

[mradtke66]

I like the structure of the deal as well but still think it's too much for Guion.

Eh, it's difficult to get both.

Guion took on some risk with the contact--the Packers can cut him at several points along the contract pretty painlessly. In exchange, they probably overpaid him slightly.

Which contract would you rather have: 11MM for 3 years, almost nothing guaranteed or (hypothetically) 8MM for 3 years, with 5MM of that guaranteed?

 

[TJV]

I like the structure of the deal as well but still think it's too much for Guion.

If the Packers agree after 2016, they can release him with a small cap hit. I like the deal because the Packers are protected cap wise if Guion tests positive for drugs, has another run-in with the law, gets injured, or under performs. I agree with mradtke66: I'd much rather have very little of the contract guaranteed vs. a lower overall value.

 

[Packerlifer]

I´m sorry, it seems like the Journal Sentinel used some wrong information. According to Wes Hodkiewicz Guion only got $500,000 in guaranteed money but will count a bit more than $3.5 million towards the cap in 2016. Here´s a link to the story containing detailled info about his contract.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp.../17/only-500k-guaranteed-guion-deal/80496154/

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...guaranteed-money-into-letroy-guions-new-deal/

 

[adambr2]

It's essentially a year to year deal for Guion. He gets a little bit more than expected but the team gets all the control over the length of the deal. I get it. He can be cut after 2016 or 2017 if he doesn't perform with almost no cap implications.