Parsons Trade

[mradtke66]

Going to be interesting how we use Parsons. He is kind of a hybrid. Awfully quick and strong.

While he's athletic enough to be a hybrid, I think he's almost exclusively an Edge these days. In 2024, he played 87% of his snaps at DL, just 12% at LB.

 

[gopkrs]

While he's athletic enough to be a hybrid, I think he's almost exclusively an Edge these days. In 2024, he played 87% of his snaps at DL, just 12% at LB.

And most likely that 12% is faking the rush and dropping back in linebacker space. Not really playing linebacker. At least not by my definition. Much better than having Preston dropping back.

 

[PackAttack12]

All of those fussing about this trade will be eating crow when the Packers are the last team standing in February.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Parsons is under contract with the packers for five years at $210 million. Contact details are always leaked by the agent and they’re always announced in the most favorable light for the player (that’s the agent’s job after all). The extension was for $47m a season but from the packers perspective it’s a five year deal averaging $42m a season. Still the most being paid to a non-QB but not by nearly as much as is being talked about.

 

[Voyageur]

Only if he doesn’t win a SB this year or next….

Next year things get really difficult. Too many free agents that we will have to let walk because of the cap from the Parsons trade.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That was my 1st thought. I could also see them on the field at the same time in some sets. Micah at LB or LVN at DT.

There is no doubt in my mind that Parson improves the defense and yes, the Packers are now in really good shape at DE. They have 4 guys that they can rotate in and out and keep everyone rested.

My concern with the trade has ZERO to do with what a healthy Parsons, playing at a high level does for the Packers. My concerns are strictly with the long term impact of investing the kind of draft and cap capital that the Packers put into Parsons. A season ending injury or drop in play will cripple the Packers in the future.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Maybe I'm missing something but doesn't the Cowboys trading for Clark also mean that they are the team responsible for any money owed him at this point. They have acquired his contract!

The Packers pushed out a lot of money that was already owed to Clark, which is now considered "Dead Cap" and it will need to be reported on the Packers cap this season and next.

All of the salary sites are busy updating stuff on both Clark and Parsons. Last I saw the Packers are sitting on $41,737,000 of dead Cap for Clark. I hope that is wrong.

 

[Raptorman]

Another Super Bowl victory would definitely settle my nerves.

You know, if you don't have a Super Bowl victory, you have no nerves to settle.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Next year things get really difficult. Too many free agents that we will have to let walk because of the cap from the Parsons trade.

Not sure how Parsons contract will be handled, but my guess is that they push it out as many years as possible. Which helps for next year, but it will once again become a huge cap liability at some point.

 

[Raptorman]

The Packers pushed out a lot of money that was already owed to Clark, which is now considered "Dead Cap" and it will need to be reported on the Packers cap this season and next.

All of the salary sites are busy updating stuff on both Clark and Parsons. Last I saw the Packers are sitting on $41,737,000 of dead Cap for Clark. I hope that is wrong.

I saw $18 and $17, so not quite $41. But until everything is reported, who knows? I also notice a hit for $17 for Alexander this year.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This is a stretch….contracts have to all be considered relative to their time frames bud

I'm not going to deep dive too far on the Hadl trade, but when it is talked about, the focus is on all the draft picks that the Packers gave up for him. When that trade happened in 1974 the Salary cap did not exist. Now maybe Hadl's salary ended up being a bad thing for a small market team like the Packers, but I don't put it in the same category as what Parson's salary will do to the Packers.

Again, the draft picks for Parsons, great get for the Packers! His salary and what it does to the cap, that is my biggest issue.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I saw $18 and $17, so not quite $41. But until everything is reported, who knows? I also notice a hit for $17 for Alexander this year.

Yup, Alexander and Bakhtiari are 2 cautionary tales as to how tying up so much money in 1 player, a non-QB, can hurt a team.

 

[David Ciembronowicz]

Not sure how Parsons contract will be handled, but my guess is that they push it out as many years as possible. Which helps for next year, but it will once again become a huge cap liability at some point.

Don't think

I saw $18 and $17, so not quite $41. But until everything is reported, who knows? I also notice a hit for $17 for Alexander this year.

When you guarantee approx. 60%+ of the money not much you can do to push out into future years and actually help, but I am no expert and NFL financing for contracts is mind numbing.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

There is no doubt in my mind that Parson improves the defense and yes, the Packers are now in really good shape at DE. They have 4 guys that they can rotate in and out and keep everyone rested.

My concern with the trade has ZERO to do with what a healthy Parsons, playing at a high level does for the Packers. My concerns are strictly with the long term impact of investing the kind of draft and cap capital that the Packers put into Parsons. A season ending injury or drop in play will cripple the Packers in the future.

If Stokes had not been a bust, let’s say he turns into the best corner in the league. Are you saying you would rather trade him instead of paying him a market value deal? The draft capital would have mattered to a different GM but as I’ve pointed out before, Gute’s history of picking in the first round is not strong. I’d rather have Parsons than future versions of Stokes and LVN not helping the team get over the hump.

 

[milani]

Two late first round picks and Kenny Clark for Parsons is close to a steal by Gluten. Dallas fans must be fuming, especially after the Doncic trade. Neither move sits well with Dallas' NFL and NBA fans.

Anyway to answer your question - yeah I'm very happy with this trade. Opponents have to account for #11 on every play. That will elevate the entire defense imo.

I believe we really strengthened our defense this season. But I also believe we mortgaged our future. In 2026 and beyond we will lose more players we simply will not have the money to sign. In the previous decade we socked the bulk of our payroll on Aaron Rodgers, Jordy Nelson, and Clay Matthews at the same time. It got us playoff teams but that was it.

 

[milani]

And most likely that 12% is faking the rush and dropping back in linebacker space. Not really playing linebacker. At least not by my definition. Much better than having Preston dropping back.

Well, they used Peppers as a LB in that 3-4 of Capers at times. But I hope he is on the DL that 87%.

 

[OldSchool101]

We already gave away our '27 6th rounder for Kinnard... so any deals should have picks coming TO GB to keep 21 year olds in camp.

As someone else pointed out. GB will likely have the maximum number of compensatory picks in 2027 because we won’t really be signing a high priced FA in 2026.

GB had 19 FA’s in a contract year. You heard that correctly. Here’s the ones that likely get signed elsewhere. Here’s my generic estimate of what they’ll return in FA compensation picks based on past formulas I’ve seen. It’s not perfect science but this will be close.
Malik Willis 4th?
Rasheed Walker 3rd
Christian Watson? resign?
Quay Walker 5th
Romeo Doubs 6th
Sean Rhyan 7th
Kingsley Ensgbare 7th

4 is max number, so the 7th’s drop off.

As of now if our contract players finish healthy. In 2027
*Traded RD1 to Dallas
RD2
RD3
RD3 comp
RD4
RD4 comp
RD5
RD5 comp
* traded RD6 to Eagles
RD6 comp
RD7

So while 2026 draft (currently) will be a light setback missing RD1, imo Brian calculated we’d be picking late #25-32, which is really not going to net you anywhere close to Parsons. On a draft scale the Parsons trade was an absolute steal. Even if Micah got picked #3 overall? A pair of #30 overall draft picks won’t get you there imo and especially if they get pushed out 2 drafts. Keeping in mind GB already got Golden THIS year.
Ok. We Traded away a 30yr year old Clark, who likely doesn’t get another deal from us and it’s likely his best years are behind him. Maybe he has 1 or 2 more good years, but after that it’s shaky at best.

I like the $$ for a 3-time All Pro player who turned 26yrs 3 months ago either. IF gets him in GB. If he was 30yrs old? he’d be more $35-40Mil area. His $$ should’ve been $41-45Mil imo. I suspect his $$ evens out 2026-2027 area.

 

[DoURant]

Parsons but a tweet out on X asking if he should wear #1 or 0.... looking like Reed might get keeping #11

 

[gopkrs]

1 wouldn't be bad at all imho

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If Stokes had not been a bust, let’s say he turns into the best corner in the league. Are you saying you would rather trade him instead of paying him a market value deal?

A better example is JaInjurie. At one time he was considered a top CB in the league and the Packers DID pay him top dollar. They did the same with Bahk.

Neither player earned their top dollar contract. Neither player finished that contract. What both players did do was give the Packers headaches in the cap department.

I would have less issue with paying top dollar contracts if they weren't guaranteed. Guaranteed money is what gets you into cap hell and the Packers just repeated that mistake with Parsons.

Only way this trade and contract works out "well" for the Packers. Parsons plays at a Pro Bowl level throughout his contract AND stays healthy. You tell me, what are the odds of that happening? I will tell you the odds of having to report his guaranteed money, as well as the loss of 2 first round picks and Kenny Clark, that is 100%.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Parsons but a tweet out on X asking if he should wear #1 or 0.... looking like Reed might get keeping #11

I don't think #1 is a Jersey the Packers allow to be worn. While it hasn't been officially retired, it is considered to represent Curly Lambeau.

 

[AmishMafia]

I'm not going to deep dive too far on the Hadl trade, but when it is talked about, the focus is on all the draft picks that the Packers gave up for him. When that trade happened in 1974 the Salary cap did not exist. Now maybe Hadl's salary ended up being a bad thing for a small market team like the Packers, but I don't put it in the same category as what Parson's salary will do to the Packers.

Again, the draft picks for Parsons, great get for the Packers! His salary and what it does to the cap, that is my biggest issue.

The cap is estimated to increase by $28M and $30M the next 2 season. By 2027, the $42m per year will look like a bargain. And we will have him through his prime years.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Don't think

I'll leave that up to you, you seem pretty good at it!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The cap is estimated to increase by $28M and $30M the next 2 season. By 2027, the $42m per year will look like a bargain. And we will have him through his prime years.

Is that how they are selling it?

Same thing they said when they dolled out the Bahk and Alexander contracts.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Parsons but a tweet out on X asking if he should wear #1 or 0.... looking like Reed might get keeping #11

It hasn't even been 24 hours and he's starting the drama!