Possible cap casualties in 2017

[adambr2]

With a limited amount of cap room for 2017 and many expiring contracts I thought I'd take a look at where money could be saved in 2017 if need be. Some of these are very unlikely cuts, but I'll mention them anyway.

Shields - $12.125M hit. Potential savings next year of $9M, or over $10.5M if a post June 1st, 2017 cut. I'm sure they'd prefer to keep him, but $12.125M will seem excessive if he doesn't have a good year in 2016, especially if Randall, Rollins, and Gunter elevate their play.

Cobb - $12.75M hit, $6.25M savings ($9.5M if post June 1st cut). While Cobb certainly needs to step up and has a significantly rising base salary in 2017, the $6.5M in dead money would be a tough pill to swallow. This won't happen unless Cobb suffers an unlikely plummet down the WR depth chart this year.

Guion - $3.66M hit, $3.33M savings. Guion is a prime cut candidate in 2017 if he doesn't have a good season. The savings is decent with a very insignificant cap hit.

Starks - $3.75M cap hit, $3M savings. With a nearly $4M cap hit I'd consider Starks at least as likely as not for a cut or restructure in 2017. The one thing Starks has working for him is Lacy's possible departure, which may make Thompson hesitant to start over completely at RB, unless a 3rd option emerges this year.

 

[Godgers12XLV]

Shields will not be a cap casualty nor should he IMO. He's a bargain for what other elite corners make and is the leader of our young CBs. our secondary is a different unit without him. his regular season numbers compare favorably to Patrick petersons and he has 4 playoff ints and a pick 6. He's worth every penny in my book. Can't underestimate a top CB in today's league.

 

[Poppa San]

Guion and Starks are the only ones listed that are on the table. TT abhors dead money. Barring career endings, the other two are okay.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

With a limited amount of cap room for 2017 and many expiring contracts I thought I'd take a look at where money could be saved in 2017 if need be. Some of these are very unlikely cuts, but I'll mention them anyway.

Shields - $12.125M hit. Potential savings next year of $9M, or over $10.5M if a post June 1st, 2017 cut. I'm sure they'd prefer to keep him, but $12.125M will seem excessive if he doesn't have a good year in 2016, especially if Randall, Rollins, and Gunter elevate their play.

Cobb - $12.75M hit, $6.25M savings ($9.5M if post June 1st cut). While Cobb certainly needs to step up and has a significantly rising base salary in 2017, the $6.5M in dead money would be a tough pill to swallow. This won't happen unless Cobb suffers an unlikely plummet down the WR depth chart this year.

Guion - $3.66M hit, $3.33M savings. Guion is a prime cut candidate in 2017 if he doesn't have a good season. The savings is decent with a very insignificant cap hit.

Starks - $3.75M cap hit, $3M savings. With a nearly $4M cap hit I'd consider Starks at least as likely as not for a cut or restructure in 2017. The one thing Starks has working for him is Lacy's possible departure, which may make Thompson hesitant to start over completely at RB, unless a 3rd option emerges this year.

I might add Bryan Bulaga ($3.05 million cap savings) and Lane Taylor ($2.4 million) to the list. While it´s improbable that Thompson will release any of the ones listed either by you or me it would make sense as long as there´s an adequate replacement on the roster.

Shields will not be a cap casualty nor should he IMO. He's a bargain for what other elite corners make and is the leader of our young CBs. our secondary is a different unit without him. his regular season numbers compare favorably to Patrick petersons and he has 4 playoff ints and a pick 6. He's worth every penny in my book. Can't underestimate a top CB in today's league.

Shields is a good cornerback but not an elite one. So far, he hasn´t played up to the contract he signed in 2014.

 

[PikeBadger]

Guion is very susceptible imo especially if Ringo improves and Pennel plays well in 2016. I think it's possible Burnett and Starks could get restructured. It will work itself out and we'll field an elite level roster in 2017 again. The insiders always notice the warts more. The NFL ensures everyone has warts.

 

[adambr2]

Guion and Starks are the only ones listed that are on the table. TT abhors dead money. Barring career endings, the other two are okay.

As much as dead money sucks, it's better than continuing to carry dead weight because you won't admit it was a mistake.
(not saying any of these players apply, but just as a practical matter).

Simple test: Look at the money saved, the dead cap subtracted from the cap hit. Would you currently pay that much to retain that player if he was a free agent? If not, that player should be released.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

+I think it's possible Burnett and Starks could get restructured. It will work itself out and we'll field an elite level roster in 2017 again.

Thompson hasn´t restructured a contract of a player performing at an adequate level for a long time. I guarantee the Packers cap issues in 2017 won´t work themselves out, it will take a lot of work and creativity from the Packers front office to address positions of need outside of the draft next offseason.

 

[PikeBadger]

Thompson hasn´t restructured a contract of a player performing at an adequate level for a long time. I guarantee the Packers cap issues in 2017 won´t work themselves out, it will take a lot of work and creativity from the Packers front office to address positions of need outside of the draft next offseason.

That's what I meant. The front office will bring it all together. It's what they do. Every year will have positions of need. Every team has them every year.

 

[PackerDNA]

Without going too deeply into technicalities, something I haven't seen discussed, but which may be the best thing to do, is converting salary in to signing bonuses. Probably the best, and least risky, option rather than cuts.

 

[adambr2]

Without going too deeply into technicalities, something I haven't seen discussed, but which may be the best thing to do, is converting salary in to signing bonuses. Probably the best, and least risky, option rather than cuts.

All of these guys will have just 1-2 years left on their deal going into 2017 though, so I don't know how much that could potentially help unless we are looking at an extension for said player.

I can't think of too many examples of Thompson doing this, I don't think he prefers that strategy. It's just kicking the can down the road, unless he's going to be trying to buy as much time as he can for the rest of Rodgers' career.

 

[PackerDNA]

It can be done. Spread it out over your highest paid players. Rodgers would be most likely the best bet for an extension. The risks would largely be contained to the yearly cap increases. Again, I haven't delved into details, it just seems to me to be a solid option to have.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

GB likes to stay true to their contracts. Especially if cutting someone ends in dead cap space... Cobb wont be cut. I always thought he would be a valuable trade chip... young, affordable...If Adams , and Montgomery break out? And the Rookie Davis is as advertised? janis, Abby... I mean, if everyone looks real good, we could trade Cobb IMO. As long as there isnt any dead cap space in the deal.

Sheilds would open up a nice chunk of cheese. Thats just a basic fact... I dont see us cutting our #1 CB when we are a contender...

Guion, worth every penny. Only reason he doesnt have dead cap is because TT played it safe considering his history. But can you replace him for $3million? heck no , he has been very solid for us, IMO. A rookie maybe but we have other positions we will have to gamble on rookies. Starks, unless he regresses, I just dont see TT cutting him. He seems to be the veteran leadership of that position. He earned his contract, and I think he will certainly play it out, barring injury...

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

taylor maybe? saves 2 mil roughly...

But honestly I dont see any place for cuts... I think the game is going to be. How many of our pieces can we retain for good value? And the rest will be draft. If in the end, we have a weakness, then we remedy with scheme for the year.

This is why I like our draft this year so much. Clark and Spriggs IMO are starters. The mid rounders all look like solid contributor types. Maybe even a starter in there. By the time we have to jump, we might already be comfortable with our replacments...

 

[mradtke66]

I always thought he would be a valuable trade chip... young, affordable......

You've forgotten the accelerated cap hit again. Not 100% accurate for this purpose, but visit over the cap. See the dead-money column that would happen if a player were to be cut? That's pretty much the same cap hit the trade-away team has to eat.

So incredibly unlikely to happen.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That's what I meant. The front office will bring it all together. It's what they do. Every year will have positions of need. Every team has them every year.

It´s not about position of need. The Packers will have a tough time re-signing all of the team´s core free agents because of salary cap issues next offseason.

Without going too deeply into technicalities, something I haven't seen discussed, but which may be the best thing to do, is converting salary in to signing bonuses. Probably the best, and least risky, option rather than cuts.

While I agree that would be smart it´s not the way Thompson has done business in the past.

 

[PikeBadger]

It´s not about position of need. The Packers will have a tough time re-signing all of the team´s core free agents because of salary cap issues next offseason.



While I agree that would be smart it´s not the way Thompson has done business in the past.

Maybe mgmt isn't interested in re-signing many of what you refer to as "core" free agents. Maybe they already are looking to replace some of these guys.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Maybe mgmt isn't interested in re-signing many of what you refer to as "core" free agents. Maybe they already are looking to replace some of these guys.

I highly doubt the Packers wouldn´t be interested in re-signing Sitton and Lang if the team could afford it.

 

[Ace]

While I agree that would be smart it´s not the way Thompson has done business in the past.

Will Thompson be the one making that decision though is the question? I have my doubts on that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Just like every other team in the NFL, the Packers will have lots of decisions with their own FA's at the end of this year. The unusual part is that of the 14 free agents, 8 of them are probable day 1 starters (Peppers, Sitton, Lang, Cook, Bahk, Hyde, Lacy, Barrington). If all these guys have non-injury productive years, there will be no way to sign them all. To further complicate it, the FA group also includes Jones, Perry, McCray and Tretter. Guys who may end up seeing extensive play and could also prove to be valuable enough to warrant another contract.

It would be a "nice problem" to have if we want to, but can't afford to resign all 12 of these players, since that probably meant they all had great years. But I think by the end of the season, there will have been an injury or two, some guys not proving to be valuable enough to keep and with our young team, guys who can be adequatly replaced with younger cheaper talent. TT and Ball will be able to sit down and hammer out who is most valuable to resign and who they can part ways with. One thing for sure, our 2018 Comp picks could potentially be maxed out!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Will Thompson be the one making that decision though is the question? I have my doubts on that.

Are you implying that the 2016 season is Thompson´s last one as the Packers general manager???

 

[Ace]

Are you implying that the 2016 season is Thompson´s last one as the Packers general manager???

Oops, did I let the cat out of the bag?

 

[El Guapo]

Nope, the cat saw it's shadow and climbed back inside the bag.

 

[Ace]

Let me be clear, I don't want Ted to walk away by any means but I don't think it's crazy whatsoever to think he may step down is all.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

At this point in his career, I can see TT stepping out on his own terms if one of 2 things happens......The Packers win a SB or there is a drastic sudden drop off in the teams success. Otherwise, its going to be a health concern or the Packers deciding to move in a new direction in 2018.

 

[PackerDNA]

I've said it before; while complex at times, Thompson is basically a simple man. They'll be no drawn out hand wringing process for him. He'll basically wake up one day, or be fishing, and decide "that's it; I've had enough".
And that. as they say, will be that.