Parsons Trade

[Pokerbrat2000]

Where is this crippling you speak of? Can you give a specific example?

Having to account for both cap and dead cap hits on major contracts can cripple an NFL team for years. If you don't think Bahk, Alexander and Rodgers cap and dead cap hits didn't prevent the Packers from signing additional free agents or extending their own players, than I can't really explain to you how large dead cap hits, for players that are either not playing or aren't even on the team, can cripple the team. Of those 3 players, I would say Rodgers was the only one that the money paid out was justified in the end.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I’m sure Micah has some diva qualities, most people do when they’re one of the best 3 people in the world at their job. However, the concerns Dallas apparently had ONLY became concerns after they traded him. He was good enough in the locker room that Jerry wanted to make him the highest paid defensive player in the NFL.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Having to account for both cap and dead cap hits on major contracts can cripple an NFL team for years. If you don't think Bahk, Alexander and Rodgers cap and dead cap hits didn't prevent the Packers from signing additional free agents or extending their own players, than I can't really explain to you how large dead cap hits, for players that are either not playing or aren't even on the team, can cripple the team. Of those 3 players, I would say Rodgers was the only one that the money paid out was justified in the end.

You’re right, but tell me the guys coming off rookie deals that are going to cost the packers a ton of money? None of the young guys have shown themselves to be worth top-end money.

Only two players in NFL history have started their careers with 4 seasons of 12+ sacks. Parsons and a guy named Reggie White. This trade was 100% worth it for Green Bay. That doesn’t mean it’s a guarantee, injuries can derail anything. But when you have a chance to get a player just starting his prime who is THIS good, with a team as close as the packers are to crossing over that jump to become “elite”, any competent GM would take it.

 

[gopkrs]

And I haven't heard Parson badmouthing anyone about this transaction. Of course I haven't heard that much

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You’re right, but tell me the guys coming off rookie deals that are going to cost the packers a ton of money? None of the young guys have shown themselves to be worth top-end money.

Now that I have seen the Parsons contract, Gute and Ball did a terrific job with this. I still think I am missing something, but if Parsons can be with the team for 3 years and then traded/cut and the average cap hit for those 3 years is only $24.55M, than he was an absolute steal.

That said, the Packers have 19 of the 53 players on the current roster with expiring contracts. Of those 19, there are some that they really may want to keep. As well as extending a guy like Jalen Reed, whose contract is up after next season.

Guys that the Packers may want to enter into a new contract with:

Quay Walker, Sheed Walker, Sean Rhyan and then you have to consider resigning one of Doubs and Watson, if either one performs at a high level this season. Throw in the 9 restricted Free agents, any of which could have a great season and suddenly yes, there will be a need to have a fluid cap after this season.

 

[mradtke66]

Having to account for both cap and dead cap hits on major contracts can cripple an NFL team for years. If you don't think Bahk, Alexander and Rodgers cap and dead cap hits didn't prevent the Packers from signing additional free agents or extending their own players, than I can't really explain to you how large dead cap hits, for players that are either not playing or aren't even on the team, can cripple the team. Of those 3 players, I would say Rodgers was the only one that the money paid out was justified in the end.

There is wide range between “crippled” and “couldn’t spend as much money as they would like.”

So again, can you provide an example where a team has been crippled bad a contract or three? Give me a team and which contracts?

The Saints are one possible case, but their problems come from continuing to re-sign and restructure players after their window closed. It has now gotten to the point where they are having to restructure under performing players to get under the cap. What started as “sunk cost fallacy” has devolved into next level awful.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There is wide range between “crippled” and “couldn’t spend as much money as they would like.”

When a team can't spend as much money as they would like to on free agents or existing players, you don't think that is a form of being "crippled"?

Setting semantics behind, Bahks contract, was crippling in my opinion. Alexanders contract didn't help the team at all.

If you want to look at a current team that is in cap hell, look up the situation in Cleveland.

I doubt any GM worth his salt attempts to get themselves into cap problems, but they do arise when the players you give big guarantees to don't meet the expectations of their contracts.

 

[mradtke66]

When a team can't spend as much money as they would like to on free agents or existing players, you don't think that is a form of being "crippled"?

I do not. There is a spectrum of “bad” and crippled is among the worst. I like to imagine a warship to illustrate the range.

Handicapped means able to do your mission with greater difficulty. For example, one gun or one turret is out of commission but the ship otherwise is good.

Disabled means loss of entire system(s) but the ship itself is not in danger. Ie, all guns or propulsion, but not sinking and repairs are in progress.

Crippled is disabled + the ship is at risk/cannot be repaired in the field and/or needs outside help to make it to a friendly port for repairs. The only thing worse is actually sinking.

Setting semantics behind,

Semantics are everything. . The line from Dead Poets says it best:

“So avoid using the word ‘very’ because it’s lazy. A man is not very tired, he is exhausted. Don’t use very sad, use morose. Language was invented for one reason, boys – to woo women – and, in that endeavor, laziness will not do.”

Bahks contract, was crippling in my opinion.

I say losing Bahk was what handicapped us, not the contract. What were we not able to do?

Alexanders contract didn't help the team at all.

Perhaps not, but it does not seem to have significantly hurt us either. Once again, the loss of the player seems to have hurt more. We were able to cut him and just make a DE the highest paid non QB. What did his contract prevent us from doing?

If you want to look at a current team that is in cap hell, look up the situation in Cleveland.

Here at least, we have a point to discuss.

I will agree Watson’s contract was foolish. To get to that point, his entire contract was guaranteed. Signing bonus and 2022-2026 base salary. This gives us a data point of what not to do. Seems like as long as you give yourself an out in the contract, you’re protected. Exactly what that form that out takes is subjective.

However, even with this contract, the Browns signed a free agent quarterback and made the playoffs in 2023.

I propose the loss of draft capital (3 1sts, a 3rd, and 2 4ths) is what is holding them back more.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I want it known that there is going to be no Micah podcast during the season. Those type of distractions are not allowed here. Save those things for the offseason, the end.

Make things very clear to Micah from the jump, so there is no conflict or butthurt later. This is not Dallas.

Did Parsons do a weekly podcast in Dallas?

I agree it can be distracting, but haven't heard if he wants to do it here. If he includes teammates over the course of the year, and it doesn't detract from real football, I don't see the harm, just then opposite. Better than having to watch Larry McCarren twice/week on the MLF show.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Honestly....that is a three year deal and EASILY walked away from then. CRAZY for the Packers structure wise. We have a SOLID 3 year window with him.

If it turns out that Parsons is gone after 3 years, what would have to be counted as dead cap, and when?

 

[Heyjoe4]

I do not. There is a spectrum of “bad” and crippled is among the worst. I like to imagine a warship to illustrate the range.

Handicapped means able to do your mission with greater difficulty. For example, one gun or one turret is out of commission but the ship otherwise is good.

Disabled means loss of entire system(s) but the ship itself is not in danger. Ie, all guns or propulsion, but not sinking and repairs are in progress.

Crippled is disabled + the ship is at risk/cannot be repaired in the field and/or needs outside help to make it to a friendly port for repairs. The only thing worse is actually sinking.

Semantics are everything. . The line from Dead Poets says it best:

“So avoid using the word ‘very’ because it’s lazy. A man is not very tired, he is exhausted. Don’t use very sad, use morose. Language was invented for one reason, boys – to woo women – and, in that endeavor, laziness will not do.”

I say losing Bahk was what handicapped us, not the contract. What were we not able to do?


Perhaps not, but it does not seem to have significantly hurt us either. Once again, the loss of the player seems to have hurt more. We were able to cut him and just make a DE the highest paid non QB. What did his contract prevent us from doing?


Here at least, we have a point to discuss.

I will agree Watson’s contract was foolish. To get to that point, his entire contract was guaranteed. Signing bonus and 2022-2026 base salary. This gives us a data point of what not to do. Seems like as long as you give yourself an out in the contract, you’re protected. Exactly what that form that out takes is subjective.

However, even with this contract, the Browns signed a free agent quarterback and made the playoffs in 2023.

I propose the loss of draft capital (3 1sts, a 3rd, and 2 4ths) is what is holding them back more.

Wow I didn't realize how much draft capital Cleveland gave up for the ability to guarantee all $236 mil. This was/is one bad deal, unless you're the Texans.

 

[RRyder]

Since the Packers seem intent on pushing towards the Super Bowl this year, this article points out a player that I'd agree, could help our secondary. Jabrill Peppers is a good safety, and could fit in nicely next to McKinney while the younger players are developing their game. It also gives the Packers more depth in an area that's needed.

as far as salary, I think Peppers would come with a reasonable price tag on a one-year contract. After this season, it probably wouldn't matter anyhow.

MSN

www.msn.com

Peppers isnt better then the guy we have starting next to Mckinney and Saftey is allready one of the deepest spots on the team.

Just cause hes a name people recognize doesn't mean hes a good idea to sign

 

[Firethorn1001]

If you create a Venn diagram of 'Packers aren't aggressive enough' and 'this trade is bad' I hope they are 2 separate circles because if they intersect then I have no idea what they are supposed to do to satisfy the 'Packers aren't aggressive enough/this trade is bad' group.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I love the way Bill Barnwell puts it in his piece on the trade. IMO he’s spot-on.

"...they don't come up for trades in their prime..." Well, unless Jerruh Jones is the owner, GM, and arguably, the HC. I have no idea what he was or wasn't thinking when he made this deal. But good for Gluten and the Packers. This is one huge signing.

 

[RRyder]

Good point. The D was better last year than most, including me, give credit for. And it just got better.

While Clark lost a step as far as getting after the QB, he was very good against the run., and now he's gone The Packers seem to like UDFA Stackhouse a lot. I expect we'll see a lot of him playing as a NT, well if there is a NT in a 4-3. I really don't know.

People really haven't watched Kenny play the last few years if theyre saying things like this

 

[RRyder]

Now that I have seen the Parsons contract, Gute and Ball did a terrific job with this. I still think I am missing something, but if Parsons can be with the team for 3 years and then traded/cut and the average cap hit for those 3 years is only $24.55M, than he was an absolute steal.

That said, the Packers have 19 of the 53 players on the current roster with expiring contracts. Of those 19, there are some that they really may want to keep. As well as extending a guy like Jalen Reed, whose contract is up after next season.

Guys that the Packers may want to enter into a new contract with:

Quay Walker, Sheed Walker, Sean Rhyan and then you have to consider resigning one of Doubs and Watson, if either one performs at a high level this season. Throw in the 9 restricted Free agents, any of which could have a great season and suddenly yes, there will be a need to have a fluid cap after this season.

Of those 1st three players Walker and Rhyan allready have their highly drafted replacements on the roster and were highly likely to be gone before the Parsons trade

Watson is comming off tearing up his knee and Doubs is one concusion away from retirement. Even before the trade only one gets brought back at most

The Parsons contract isnt going to have much of an effect on who we retain in free agency since those players were most likely gone beforehand but rather their ability to sign outside players in free agency.

On the plus side that means we will most likely max out on the 4 extra comp picks in two years

I would also imagine Enagbare is being dangled as trade bait right now

 

[tynimiller]

Yup and honestly, it makes me feel a whole lot better about this trade. I really haven't broken down the details and how they were able to fit it into THOSE favorable terms for the Packers, but the 3 years of cap hits and the dead cap remaining after those 3 years, is spectacular.

Ball and Gute pulled this deal off with this structure in mind. Definitely not as painful as initially thought (by me).

I also am now not negative hardly at all for this trade. LIGHTS OUT CAP NUMBER STRUCTURE.

And if he loves it here, he’ll be 29 and we could do a one year restructure and put like $20m in his pocket and slide years like they are out one at a time even…

In love with this structure

 

[tynimiller]

If it turns out that Parsons is gone after 3 years, what would have to be counted as dead cap, and when?

It’s in that image of contract to the far right

 

[Deleted member 18607 aka in gute we trust]

Golden was pissed they allowed Micah to wear #1, when he was told he couldn't. Golden now switched from 22 to zero.

 

[Firethorn1001]

I also am now not negative hardly at all for this trade. LIGHTS OUT CAP NUMBER STRUCTURE.


In love with this structure

Me after seeing the structure :

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[RRyder]

Golden was pissed they allowed Micah to wear #1, when he was told he couldn't. Golden now switched from 22 to zero.

Reed was the one told no

Reed was also a 2nd round pick. Micah Parsons is Micah Parsons

 

[Deleted member 18607 aka in gute we trust]

Reed was the one told no

Reed was also a 2nd round pick. Micah Parsons is Micah Parsons

Golden first wanted 2, and of course Malik had that. Then Golden asked if 1 was available, he was told about the Curly Lambeau unofficially retired number, as Reed was also told.

Micah Parsons is not some god. Get over that thought. He is not above any of his teammates.

I am glad Golden switched from 22 to 0 after Micah chose to wear number 1. MG saying: "You think you the only one around here that can wear whatever number you want?"

I may get a Golden #0 jersey now. I liked his power play here.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Now that I have seen the Parsons contract, Gute and Ball did a terrific job with this. I still think I am missing something, but if Parsons can be with the team for 3 years and then traded/cut and the average cap hit for those 3 years is only $24.55M, than he was an absolute steal.

That said, the Packers have 19 of the 53 players on the current roster with expiring contracts. Of those 19, there are some that they really may want to keep. As well as extending a guy like Jalen Reed, whose contract is up after next season.

Guys that the Packers may want to enter into a new contract with:

Quay Walker, Sheed Walker, Sean Rhyan and then you have to consider resigning one of Doubs and Watson, if either one performs at a high level this season. Throw in the 9 restricted Free agents, any of which could have a great season and suddenly yes, there will be a need to have a fluid cap after this season.

None of those guys is getting a top of market deal.

 

[RRyder]

Golden first wanted 2, and of course Malik had that. Then Golden asked if 1 was available, he was told about the Curly Lambeau unofficially retired number, as Reed was also told.

Micah Parsons is not some god. Get over that thought. He is not above any of his teammates.

I am glad Golden switched from 22 to 0 after Micah chose to wear number 1. MG saying: "You think you the only one around here that can wear whatever number you want?"

I may get a Golden #0 jersey now. I liked his power play here.

Im not the one making **** up about players being upset

Like damn dude. Youre sounding like Jerry right now

 

[OldSchool101]

Having to account for both cap and dead cap hits on major contracts can cripple an NFL team for years. If you don't think Bahk, Alexander and Rodgers cap and dead cap hits didn't prevent the Packers from signing additional free agents or extending their own players, than I can't really explain to you how large dead cap hits, for players that are either not playing or aren't even on the team, can cripple the team. Of those 3 players, I would say Rodgers was the only one that the money paid out was justified in the end.

Listen. There’s no right or wrong answers in this one. 100% merit to both sides of these arguments. You’ve heard me and also seen me list the numbers of players we could have with cumulative capital spent on a trade like this. I jumped on Chicago for doing this almost exactly same time of season 9/1/2018 So I fully understand the fiscal concern argument. Although they did go from 4th in Division to
#1 at 12-4 that year, then 3rd in 2019, 2nd in 2020. However they STARTED at 5-11 when they traded. Here’s my contention on the tie breaker on this decision and I said this prior to Jeremiah.

Daniel Jeremiah just said this in an interview I saw this morning and He’s not a Packer fan that I know of or does he concern himself with our debate. He’s objectively looking at it from BOTH cowboys and Packers sided.
He said for GM one of the most important criteria is knowing WHEN to make a push. Such as some teams are in complete rebuild or partial rebuild and Parsons trade would NOT be a good trade off. Some are in decline. Some teams are 1 maybe 2 true BLUE chip players from morphing into Elite level. He all but said this was Green Bay.

Our #1 weakness was our overall pass rush productivity. While we do have ascending players like LVN or Cox or Cooper, they aren’t deemed far enough along to wager a strong bet that they will shoot up the pass rush meter rather. One ranking I saw was GB was at 29th in pass rush and Rashan Gary didn’t break the top 40?? That’s an issue most would agree. Somewhere we got involved and still tied for #8 in sacks, but overall we were desperately needing to improve on D in that regard in order to compete with Eagles, Detroit etc. Brian was speculated to have reached out to multiple teams for attempts at a trade at DE. It just so happened we got lucky. Parsons hadn’t signed yet. Voila. Pass Rush solved. Just outside of GB understand the magnitude of this move, it’s just we’re hesitant inside to enjoy the ride (because it’s our wallet).

Ranking the NFL's Top Pass-Rushing Duos After Micah Parsons Trade

A look at the top pass rushing duos in the NFL after the Cowboys traded Micah Parsons to the Packers.

www.si.com