Trade Deadline Approaching

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,910
Reaction score
4,865
I had the Minny game as a loss. No Jefferson and a windy day could lead to a home win. IMO.

Very very true.

And FTR of course you win two and hopefully mix a Lions loss in there and you might change the tune or at least need more to make you “sell”
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
4,189
Reaction score
1,506
I may be wrong, but trading 26 yr old Alexander saves $50mil on future caps in fully guaranteed base salary, but would result in a '24 dead cap hit of over $30mil from his SB $. Unless he's a bad apple, which I haven't heard ANYTHING to support that, why jettison a star player?
Don't we have enough dead cap hitting us next year already.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
4,189
Reaction score
1,506
Actually not anywhere close to this year….Rodgers alone is causing us to swallow $40m plus pill this year against the cap
Now I suddenly developed indigestion from that pill. $40 mill is horrific. Looking back we either keep Rodgers and let him get hurt as we lose games...Or it was a bad deal in the beginning. My guess is the latter. I like to think that the Pats came away without any financial issues when Brady's time came. But then Brady left and won a ring. Rodgers may not get there.
 
Last edited:

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,474
Reaction score
604
Smith trade saves us $3M
Jones would cause a fiscal pill needed to be swallowed even if you get creative in possible restructure and trade...but is why the return would need to be significant to move him.
Savage you get rid of now as he isn't signed beyond this year and you get something for a guy perhaps you are not planning on attempting to resign. His voided money is getting paid whether you trade him, don't trade or cut him.
Aha. My real apparent mistake was thinking that, since it's 2023, the 2023 contract line would apply. Since Smith's line for 2024 saves 3 mil, then anyone the trade this year counts against next year's cap? Definitely puts a whole new light on things. Thanks.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,910
Reaction score
4,865
Aha. My real apparent mistake was thinking that, since it's 2023, the 2023 contract line would apply. Since Smith's line for 2024 saves 3 mil, then anyone the trade this year counts against next year's cap? Definitely puts a whole new light on things. Thanks.

Roughly, obviously there is some cost now, but most of them per game cost savings now for us would be quite small in comparison to the hit we already took for this year. You're not entirely wrong and my amounts could be slightly higher than actual savings but yea, 2023 hit has hit for the most part on Smith and Jones....now Savage was a 5th year guarantee so we don't save anything this year game pay wise on him.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
525
Location
Madison, WI
I like to think that the Pats came away without any financial issues when Brady's time came.

I don't think that's true. BB had an interesting press conference after Brady left and said something to the effect of "Yup, we have a lot of dead cap coming due this year. Don't care, won the Super Bowl."

Covid opt-outs actually helped the Pats in 2020 as some contracts just tolled.

EDIT: Did some looking, looks like Brady left the Pats with roughly a 13.5M cap hit when he left. Far less than Rodgers, but he left later in the contract. I think 1 year remaining vs. Rodgers (I believe) 3 years. SportTrac just shows Rodger's former Packers contract in summary, so I can't break down what his hit would have been had we traded/released him with only 1 year remaining. Quick and dirty math, 40M in bonus / 3 three years remaining = 15M per year, which is inline with Brady. However, I don't know his yearly salary and any other bonuses he might have received.
 
Last edited:

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
4,189
Reaction score
1,506
I don't think that's true. BB had an interesting press conference after Brady left and said something to the effect of "Yup, we have a lot of dead cap coming due this year. Don't care, won the Super Bowl."

Covid opt-outs actually helped the Pats in 2020 as some contracts just tolled.

EDIT: Did some looking, looks like Brady left the Pats with roughly a 13.5M cap hit when he left. Far less than Rodgers, but he left later in the contract. I think 1 year remaining vs. Rodgers (I believe) 3 years. SportTrac just shows Rodger's former Packers contract in summary, so I can't break down what his hit would have been had we traded/released him with only 1 year remaining. Quick and dirty math, 40M in bonus / 3 three years remaining = 15M per year, which is inline with Brady. However, I don't know his yearly salary and any other bonuses he might have received.
Like BB said: We won a SB. I do not think we would have won one more even if Rodgers stayed 2 more years.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
12,026
Reaction score
2,957
If the Packers don't bounce back in a major way after the bye week, they should look to be sellers at the deadline. These are the players that I think it makes sense to trade away for draft capital, in that they could/should have value, they don't fit the long-term vision of the Packers, and their contracts don't make such a move impossible:

Rasul Douglas: I've floated the idea of trading Jaire, but I don't think that's altogether realistic with his contract. Douglas' is much easier to trade away and makes him pretty valuable. He's playing the best football of his career right now, but he's also a little on the older end so he might not fit the timeline of the Packers. Furthermore, you would ideally like to use a developmental season to get a look at younger talent on the roster, especially Stokes and Valentine. Given his age, the current quality of his play, and the favorable contract through 2024, I bet they could get a 3rd or 4th round pick in return. It would suck to lose a guy like him, but signing a player for basically nothing, developing him into a valuable asset, and then extracting that value when it suits you... that's smart team-building.

Yosh Nijman: The loss of Bakhtiari puts a premium on OT depth, but Nijman has clearly fallen out of favor and the Packers also seem to really like Luke Tenuta. Tenuta was placed on IR, but I believe that they intentionally got him on the initially 53 man roster, which would indicate that they expect him to be able to return to play. So if Nijman is 4th or even 5th (Caleb Jones) at the position even without Bakh, it makes sense to move him. A 5th or 6th round pick would be a good return, and wouldn't be an unreasonable expectation given how desperate some teams currently are for some stable OL play.

A.J. Dillon: Green Bay clearly isn't satisfied with the play at RB behind Jones. Dillon is in a contract year and has some decent play in his past. There's a chance that another team might believe they can get him back to what he was previously. But I wouldn't expect more than a 7th rounder if that took place. They could also trade him for another team's disappointment and see if a change of scenery helps one or both guys.

If they made all three of these moves and recouped a 3rd, 5th, and 7th, that would be a pretty successful deadline.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,305
Reaction score
5,691
If the Packers don't bounce back in a major way after the bye week, they should look to be sellers at the deadline. These are the players that I think it makes sense to trade away for draft capital, in that they could/should have value, they don't fit the long-term vision of the Packers, and their contracts don't make such a move impossible:

Rasul Douglas: I've floated the idea of trading Jaire, but I don't think that's altogether realistic with his contract. Douglas' is much easier to trade away and makes him pretty valuable. He's playing the best football of his career right now, but he's also a little on the older end so he might not fit the timeline of the Packers. Furthermore, you would ideally like to use a developmental season to get a look at younger talent on the roster, especially Stokes and Valentine. Given his age, the current quality of his play, and the favorable contract through 2024, I bet they could get a 3rd or 4th round pick in return. It would suck to lose a guy like him, but signing a player for basically nothing, developing him into a valuable asset, and then extracting that value when it suits you... that's smart team-building.

Yosh Nijman: The loss of Bakhtiari puts a premium on OT depth, but Nijman has clearly fallen out of favor and the Packers also seem to really like Luke Tenuta. Tenuta was placed on IR, but I believe that they intentionally got him on the initially 53 man roster, which would indicate that they expect him to be able to return to play. So if Nijman is 4th or even 5th (Caleb Jones) at the position even without Bakh, it makes sense to move him. A 5th or 6th round pick would be a good return, and wouldn't be an unreasonable expectation given how desperate some teams currently are for some stable OL play.

A.J. Dillon: Green Bay clearly isn't satisfied with the play at RB behind Jones. Dillon is in a contract year and has some decent play in his past. There's a chance that another team might believe they can get him back to what he was previously. But I wouldn't expect more than a 7th rounder if that took place. They could also trade him for another team's disappointment and see if a change of scenery helps one or both guys.

If they made all three of these moves and recouped a 3rd, 5th, and 7th, that would be a pretty successful deadline.
some good ideas tossed around and I’d agree with most of that.

If I might explain why I’m thinking another path with Rasu (unless it’s a stupid good offer such as a 4th rounder etc)
He just turned 28yrs last month so he’s got juice left and we’ve been somewhat injury prone recently at CB.
Id give him an in/season offer before he hits the market. If he agreed to replicate that 3/$21 but “all-in” with ~$9 guaranteed (2024-2026). That sounds semi-aggressive, but remember he’s got near $4mil dead if we walk him from $$ we’ve pushed into the future
So potentially a 3/$17-18 with what feels like +$5 additional guaranteed for 2024, but on the flip side a slightly reduced $6mil annual.

That type deal gives him most likely 2 years of staying in his current environment at reasonable $$ for both sides. It addresses the age barrier you spoke of he’d be winding down with us after his 30th Bday. If he’s still top of his game, we’ve got 1 more season at very reasonable $ for 2026 OR go your path of trading him. Worst thing that happens is Stokes regains 2021 form and J’aire stays healthy. Otherwise we’ve got 3 really good Corners and backups already in system for contingency.
For our commitment it gives us great consistency at CB and allows us to focus on other positions of need. If Rasul slows down? we have a lesser hit in 2025 than we do currently in 2024
 
Last edited:

Pugger

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
2,616
Reaction score
756
Location
N. Fort Myers, FL
Smith trade saves us $3M
Jones would cause a fiscal pill needed to be swallowed even if you get creative in possible restructure and trade...but is why the return would need to be significant to move him.
Savage you get rid of now as he isn't signed beyond this year and you get something for a guy perhaps you are not planning on attempting to resign. His voided money is getting paid whether you trade him, don't trade or cut him.
We could get something decent for Smith but with Jones' but sore hammy, age and position I don't see another team offering us much for him, especially with his contract. Jaire could be tempting to another team but would he pass a physical with that back of his?
 

Pugger

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
2,616
Reaction score
756
Location
N. Fort Myers, FL
If the Packers don't bounce back in a major way after the bye week, they should look to be sellers at the deadline. These are the players that I think it makes sense to trade away for draft capital, in that they could/should have value, they don't fit the long-term vision of the Packers, and their contracts don't make such a move impossible:

Rasul Douglas: I've floated the idea of trading Jaire, but I don't think that's altogether realistic with his contract. Douglas' is much easier to trade away and makes him pretty valuable. He's playing the best football of his career right now, but he's also a little on the older end so he might not fit the timeline of the Packers. Furthermore, you would ideally like to use a developmental season to get a look at younger talent on the roster, especially Stokes and Valentine. Given his age, the current quality of his play, and the favorable contract through 2024, I bet they could get a 3rd or 4th round pick in return. It would suck to lose a guy like him, but signing a player for basically nothing, developing him into a valuable asset, and then extracting that value when it suits you... that's smart team-building.

Yosh Nijman: The loss of Bakhtiari puts a premium on OT depth, but Nijman has clearly fallen out of favor and the Packers also seem to really like Luke Tenuta. Tenuta was placed on IR, but I believe that they intentionally got him on the initially 53 man roster, which would indicate that they expect him to be able to return to play. So if Nijman is 4th or even 5th (Caleb Jones) at the position even without Bakh, it makes sense to move him. A 5th or 6th round pick would be a good return, and wouldn't be an unreasonable expectation given how desperate some teams currently are for some stable OL play.

A.J. Dillon: Green Bay clearly isn't satisfied with the play at RB behind Jones. Dillon is in a contract year and has some decent play in his past. There's a chance that another team might believe they can get him back to what he was previously. But I wouldn't expect more than a 7th rounder if that took place. They could also trade him for another team's disappointment and see if a change of scenery helps one or both guys.

If they made all three of these moves and recouped a 3rd, 5th, and 7th, that would be a pretty successful deadline.
I don't see any team out there eager to take Dillon off of our hands.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,910
Reaction score
4,865
I don't see any team out there eager to take Dillon off of our hands.
Eager no, but if a team that is in the hunt and has outside playoff games an option, giving us a fifth or sixth for him would be a fire deal if they make it.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,910
Reaction score
4,865
So I still would love to see a veteran WR added or TE.


Even a LOW tier vet like a Zach Pascal for a seventh type deal with Cardinals
 

Pkrjones

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
3,812
Reaction score
1,729
Location
Northern IL
So I still would love to see a veteran WR added or TE.


Even a LOW tier vet like a Zach Pascal for a seventh type deal with Cardinals
Why? A marginally productive vet just takes away snaps from Reed, Wicks, or Toure. Does that vet give any upside benefit, e.g. speed, great catch-rate, significantly better blocking, etc?
Imho, suffer thru the growing pains & reap the experience-rewards in future games/seasons.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,910
Reaction score
4,865
Why? A marginally productive vet just takes away snaps from Reed, Wicks, or Toure. Does that vet give any upside benefit, e.g. speed, great catch-rate, significantly better blocking, etc?
Imho, suffer thru the growing pains & reap the experience-rewards in future games/seasons.

There is a ton of things a vet sees, understands and knows - snaps in the dozen or so a game isn’t setting anyone back.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,305
Reaction score
5,691
A veteran presence in a position group is pretty important. A bunch of new guys running routes incorrectly and jumping offsides or creating unnecessary penalties or failed assignments which eventually leading to Turnovers or injuring our RB or WR or QB isn’t a desired outcome.
I’d say it’s ok to be young, but it’s not ok to gut your Roster of Veterans or just “wing it” with inexperience. Next man up only goes so far. Sometimes next man to replace an All Pro is a temporary fix.

What I don’t want is a player prematurely placed into the fold that’s not ready. It’s a good way to get our QB killed or have your RB get assaulted 5 yards in the backfield, like we’ve just witnessed. Id love a really good blocking TE who can be a reckoning force in the blocking game which could spark our Running game. Someone to temporarily replace one of the best Run blocking TE’s in the business. I’d be ok with an O Tackle who can offer some stability through 2023 or 2024 while we scramble to fill a massive void left by missing our starting All Pro blindside Tackle

As much as I’d love to pick top 5 and I would. I’d much more prefer to squeak into the postseason and upset someone and pick 25 overall. Another but less preferable would be to finish 7-10 winning 5 of our last 6 contests to close the season out and be picking #11 overall
 
Last edited:

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
2,710
Reaction score
1,560
If the Packers don't bounce back in a major way after the bye week, they should look to be sellers at the deadline. These are the players that I think it makes sense to trade away for draft capital, in that they could/should have value, they don't fit the long-term vision of the Packers, and their contracts don't make such a move impossible:

Rasul Douglas: I've floated the idea of trading Jaire, but I don't think that's altogether realistic with his contract. Douglas' is much easier to trade away and makes him pretty valuable. He's playing the best football of his career right now, but he's also a little on the older end so he might not fit the timeline of the Packers. Furthermore, you would ideally like to use a developmental season to get a look at younger talent on the roster, especially Stokes and Valentine. Given his age, the current quality of his play, and the favorable contract through 2024, I bet they could get a 3rd or 4th round pick in return. It would suck to lose a guy like him, but signing a player for basically nothing, developing him into a valuable asset, and then extracting that value when it suits you... that's smart team-building.

Yosh Nijman: The loss of Bakhtiari puts a premium on OT depth, but Nijman has clearly fallen out of favor and the Packers also seem to really like Luke Tenuta. Tenuta was placed on IR, but I believe that they intentionally got him on the initially 53 man roster, which would indicate that they expect him to be able to return to play. So if Nijman is 4th or even 5th (Caleb Jones) at the position even without Bakh, it makes sense to move him. A 5th or 6th round pick would be a good return, and wouldn't be an unreasonable expectation given how desperate some teams currently are for some stable OL play.

A.J. Dillon: Green Bay clearly isn't satisfied with the play at RB behind Jones. Dillon is in a contract year and has some decent play in his past. There's a chance that another team might believe they can get him back to what he was previously. But I wouldn't expect more than a 7th rounder if that took place. They could also trade him for another team's disappointment and see if a change of scenery helps one or both guys.

If they made all three of these moves and recouped a 3rd, 5th, and 7th, that would be a pretty successful deadline.
I am one of the people down on Dillon but I would not trade him for a 7th. I would let him play and hopefully like TYNI said prove he is at least a late season bad weather back that a team might sign and turn into a comp pick. In order to help evaluate Love trading one of the few skill position guys who know the system just isn't worth a 7th IMO.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,374
Reaction score
1,276
I am one of the people down on Dillon but I would not trade him for a 7th. I would let him play and hopefully like TYNI said prove he is at least a late season bad weather back that a team might sign and turn into a comp pick. In order to help evaluate Love trading one of the few skill position guys who know the system just isn't worth a 7th IMO.
I'm not high on Dillon either but I don't understand how people can seemingly be excited about getting 5th 6th and/or 7th round draft picks. For anybody. So we are gonna load our team up with a bunch of late round picks?
 

Firethorn1001

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
1,527
Reaction score
1,081
Right now, Dillon has more value to the Packers than any late pick he would get. They are trying to evaluate Love and with Aaron Jones being injured, you don't make life more difficult for Love by trading really the only running back the Packers have especially for just a 6th or 7th rounder.

Smith/Nijman make sense. I have this weird feeling Jeudy is going to be a Packer. Seems like there has been enough smoke around him over the years.

I thought they should have traded Alexander along with Adams and Rodgers the year prior. The haul of picks trading all of those guys would have set them up for 2023/2024 drafts. Hindsight...
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
4,189
Reaction score
1,506
I am one of the people down on Dillon but I would not trade him for a 7th. I would let him play and hopefully like TYNI said prove he is at least a late season bad weather back that a team might sign and turn into a comp pick. In order to help evaluate Love trading one of the few skill position guys who know the system just isn't worth a 7th IMO.
If there is one attribute he has it is that he seems to be able to stay on the field. His body must be durable so far.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top