1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

We dont have as much money as you think

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by longtimefan, Mar 13, 2014.

  1. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,450
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    So you think the Packers should have let Matthews walk away???
     
  2. Ace

    Ace Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Ratings:
    +335
    After reading the article and doing some simple research I fully understand why he hasn't been a player in free agency.

    I took all of these numbers from sportrac.com...
    We all know the situation we are in currently as far as how much money we have and while it appears we have plenty of cap space, as the article states it's going to get eaten up fast.

    What I did is went further into the future to see what kind of position we will be in after 2015...
    Going into the 2016 season we currently have $73,852,339 on the books not including Jordy and Randall with only 15 guys under contract.
    Going into the 2017 season we currently have $54,975,000 on the books and only 4 guys under contract.

    Assuming APY for Randall and Jordy are $8 and $10M respectively that puts us at roughly $92 on the books for 2016 with 17 players under contract, and roughly $73M on the books for 2017 with 6 guys under contract.

    Obviously all contracts can be structured differently to create space here and there but from a general financial standpoint the money just isn't there after 2015. Going into 2017 assuming the cap is around $160M we are looking at roughly 45% of the cap being taken up by 6 guys. I still expect him to sign a few guys this offseason but it will be 1 or 2 year deals for little money.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,450
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    Our top 15 players last year had a cap hit of $74,688,525 with a cap of $123 million, it´s normal that the top guys earn a lot of money and the bottom of the depth chart is filled with guys playing for the league minimum. The numbers you posted above don´t restrain us from signing free agents.
     
  4. Ace

    Ace Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Ratings:
    +335
    I agree but what I'm saying is the Byrds of the world are pipe dreams for a team like us because of how we conduct business. Ted retains his own guys and retains them in such a way that he wont have to cut them in order to create space just so that he can be a player in free agency.

    This draft is going to be so crucial for the success or failure of this team. He HAS to hit this year more then any other year IMO and hope Datone, Hayward, Daniels, Sam and Hyde continue to progress. Perry IMO is what he is I don't really know how much better he is going to get but he will have a role.

    My point was is as frustrated as I and others can get when it comes to Ted and free agency, it is for a reason other then he hates to spend money in free agency as some I think honestly believe.
     
  5. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,450
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    I agree with most of it. Byrd was the first high-priced free agent in a long time I would have liked the Packers to sign and I think the contract he signed with the Saints would have worked with our cap in the long term. Teams that do stuff like that on a regular basis though will have troubles managing the cap, no doubt about that.

    But signing some veterans to reasonable deals makes sense, especially with the needs the Packers have on defense.
     
  6. Ace

    Ace Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Ratings:
    +335
    Absolutely and I still believe that he will but any long term high priced guys (not that there are any left) just wasn't ever going to happen.
     
  7. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,526
    Ratings:
    +1,835
    That is the economics of the situation that some fans don't get. We have a finite resource ($) and the objective is to get the most talent on the field. Signing guys because you have money and they represent a talent upgrade is fine in of itself. However, you have to look at the entire picture. You have to weigh all starting positions and the money available to invest there.

    If they could do it over again, would the Bears have signed Peppers? Doubtful. Another aspect of Peppers, he loses interest quickly. Bears suffer a bit of adversity, and he quits. How has that attitude affected the overall performance and development of young players? Of course we will never know, but I think it may be significant.
    What does Hyde's draft position mean when figuring out if he will be a good safety? If last years draft was reheld today, I think Hyde is going in the 1st round. Does that mean he will be better at safety? Hyde has all the tools. He is tough, likes to tackle, has good cover skills, has a high football IQ, and is surprisingly quick. Why don't you think he will be successful at Safety?

    Here is my thinking. I know many are down on Burnett, and I was rather disappointed with his play as well. I am not sure what happened. When he came back from injury, he played very good for 2 or 3 games and then he trailed off. So, I have not given up on him. Jennings was awful. The other guy we cut was even worse. I am sure the poor performance by Burnett was in part due to his trying to compensate for the inadequacies playing alongside of him. Hyde can be a good S. And we also have Sean Richardson who has great size and tremendous athletic skills. He was set back by injury (Damn I am getting sick of writing that when talking about Packer players) and is getting a full offseason to work. He is just a classic boom/bust type who still has a chance to prove himself.

    There are two safeties in the draft who will be immediate impact players for us, HaHa and Pryor. I don't think we will have a chance at HaHa and I think there will be better options than Pryor at our pick. In the 2nd and 3rd, there will be a bunch of options for us. These are guys who will be immediate upgrades, but will take a season or two before they develop (hopefully) into impact players. Bucannon, Dowling, and Ward in the 2nd. Dixon, Loston, Huff, Brooks, Bailey, Desir, and a few others in the 3rd.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,450
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    That´s true, but taking that into account it´s possible to argue that the contract the Packers handed out to Matthews prevents them from fielding a competitive team around him.

    I like moving Hyde to safety as well, I just hope it´s not the Packers only move without any backup plan.
     
  9. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,564
    Ratings:
    +1,452
    Actually, I do...but you didn't want to hear that.

    They are related but different situations in that re-signing Matthews (a team's own player) is generally more cap-friendly than signing a FA out for his payday - assuming the head negotiator is worth his salt. Julius Peppers didn't negotiate a cap-friendly deal with the Bears because he was leaving Carolina to get paid.

    Free Agency, much like the stock market, works out much better for you if you can scout out talent / stocks ahead of their ascendancy of worth versus when they are at their peak. Only suckers buy stocks when they are peaking unless they are assured continued growth, which is rare. The same tends to go with free agency. Draft the talent and harness them while they are cheap, then let others pay for their success in your system.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  10. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,450
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    I´m actually surprised you think about it that way, as he´s our only difference maker on defense. On a site note, it would be nice if you wouldn´t assume stuff about me as you don´t know me at all.

    TT tends to overpay our own free agents and I don´t think Matthews deal can be called cap-friendly.
     
  11. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,564
    Ratings:
    +1,452
    You assumed how I would think about this....pot calling kettle black

    That's exactly why I think about it that way. Large contracts hamstring a team. I'd rather see that money spread out amongst several difference makers that don't necessarily need to be elite. QB is the only position that I value above all of the rest on a football team. I'm relatively fine with Rodgers' contract being larger, but of course wish it was smaller. The rest of the money should be spread more evenly and stars should be allowed to leave if they want to break the bank so that competitive players can still be fielded for the team.

    I tend to think similarly about the draft. I would prefer that we mostly trade away our first round and second round picks to secure a bunch of mid-round picks. I think that in addition to quality scouting, a big part of the draft is just luck. Therefore I'd rather rely on quantity vs quality. Scout out all of the best mid-round picks and cut away the duds at the end of training camp. You don't need 1st round picks to win championships. You need enough quality players to field a balanced team with as few deficiencies as possible and the depth to survive injuries. Big contracts and #1 picks tend to go in the opposite direction.

    It's cap-friendly compared to what Matthews would have commanded out on the market...and that's the point as it's related to Peppers
     
  12. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,450
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    While I agree to some degree that large contracts kind of hamstring a team I don't think it's a great strategy to let significant contributors walk away after their rookie deals are finished just when they enter their primes.

    The Packers can't fix their defense with first round picks, what makes you think they would be more succesful with later round picks??? And don't forget that both of our superstar players were first round picks.

    I highly doubt Matthews would have gotten more on the open market.
     
  13. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,526
    Ratings:
    +1,835
    Haywood 2nd round (last pick) DROY candidate
    Hyde 5th round All rookie team
    Williams street FA
    Shields street FA
    Johnny Jolly - uber stud
    Daniels - probably our best DL last season 4th round
     
  14. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,450
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    There some parts missing to a good defense tough.
     
  15. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,526
    Ratings:
    +1,835
    Love to have another DE, a tone setting MLB, an effective Safety, and a backup OLB.

    We have Worthy/Boyd at DE. Barrington/Palmer at LB. We have Richardson/Hyde as potential Safeties. Not all of these guys are going to step up and make an impact, but some will. Not all of our picks this coming draft will make an impact, but some will.
     
  16. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,450
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    There are and will always be late round picks or undrafted guys who will produce at the NFL level. The chance of getting an impact player in the first round is way higher though, so trading them away all the time wouldn't make any sense to me.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,526
    Ratings:
    +1,835
    I agree. I think this year, there is a good chance there is a defensive BPA that will impact our team at 21. If not, then I think we should trade back into the 2nd. The next talent tier I think goes pretty deep into the 3rd round. So if we can pick 2 out of the next talent tier, we are better off than reaching at 21 or getting an impact player at an already deep position. If we trade back 20 spots, we are still getting a guy who can start and has significant upside. The additional early 3rd would also have a good chance to start and help the team immediately.
     
  18. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    5,450
    Ratings:
    +2,389
    I think trading back does make sense sometimes, it all depends though which players are available when you're on the clock and how deep a draft is. I wouldn't mind trading back this season if both of the safeties and Mosley are gone at #21.

    It worked out pretty well for the Packers in 2008 when we got Nelson.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,564
    Ratings:
    +1,452
    This statement of "way more" is backed up by what?

    Looking at my own records of Packer draft history since 1980, the Packers have had the following success rates in each round:

    59% First Round
    58% Second Round
    39% Third Round
    41% Fourth Round
    29% Fifth Round
    39% Sixth Round
    25% Seventh Round

    In a hypothetical situation over ten years, if the Packers kept each original draft pick in each round, their average draft success would be:

    6 successful 1st Rd drafted players
    6 successful 2nd Rd drafted players
    4 successful 3rd Rd drafted players
    4 successful 4th Rd drafted players
    3 successful 5th Rd drafted players
    4 successful 6th Rd drafted players
    3 successful 7th Rd drafted players
    30 Total Successful Players out of 70 draftees (43%)

    The Packers average 1st round draft position is 17 which is worth 950 points in the value chart and worth more than 2nd (430 value), 3rd (195 value), and 4th (72 value) round picks in the middle of each round. So assume you can trade a 1st for three picks. If you now trade your original 2nd round pick - assuming middle round value of 430 - then you could again assume getting in return a 3rd (195 value), 4th (72 value), and 5th (34.5 value).

    We these extra picks in that same ten year span and using the Packers same historical success rate, you get:

    0 1st Rd drafted players (first round picks traded for 2, 3, 4)
    6 successful 2nd Rd drafted players (second round picks traded for 3, 4, 5 - still have 2nd rounder from above)
    12 successful 3rd Rd drafted players (two extra 3rd round picks in each draft)
    12 successful 4th Rd drafted players (two extra 4th round picks in each draft)
    6 successful 5th Rd drafted players (one extra 5th round pick in each draft)
    4 successful 6th Rd drafted players
    3 successful 7th Rd drafted players
    43 Total Successful Players out of 110 draftees (39%)

    Over ten years of trading away your higher picks and assuming the same success rate in each round (and obviously finding trading partners each year), you will end up with 13 more quality players on your roster and will not have paid as much in rookie salaries. Plus, with a greater influx of potential contributors each season, a team could be more willing to let its elite players test free agency, thus saving cap space and team dollars.
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
  20. Poppa San

    Poppa San SB I trophy First of four Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    4,385
    Ratings:
    +1,022
    For the slower among us, what were your criteria for success?
     
  21. weeds

    weeds Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,115
    Ratings:
    +1,063
    People who choose to not understand TT's philosophy need only read Ron Wolf's book "The Packer Way". I'll bet they will still choose to not understand TT's philosophy.
     
  22. Bagadeez04

    Bagadeez04 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    381
    Ratings:
    +133
    Also don't forget the bears gave up two firsts and a second round pick to get Cutler a few years ago. That certainly played a part in hurting the roster's development
     
  23. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,869
    Ratings:
    +1,399
    With all due respect, I think that 2nd sentence is crazy to say Hyde would go in the 1st round in a redraft. Maybe 2nd or 3rd. Hyde had a promising rookie season. You don't go from a 5th rounder to a 1st rounder with "promising". There isn't a GM in history who would give up 1st round pick for him, or we would jump all over it.

    I never said Hyde won't be successful at safety. I said to go into the season with that as our "Plan A" to fix our safety problem from last year would be a pretty poor primary plan. Similarly, last year at this time most of us felt pretty good about our young safeties with Jennings and McMillian. The plan was for one of them to emerge, and I'm sure the front office felt they both had a lot of promise, particularly McMillian. I don't think the plan was for both young safeties to massively flop.

    I agree Hyde has all the tools, but that doesn't mean it's automatically going to happen, and even if it does that doesn't mean it will be an immediate impact without growing pains. Some corners never are able to make that transition.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  24. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,526
    Ratings:
    +1,835
    I completely disagree and think you are crazy. I don't deserve much respect at all! I'm kind of an a$$hole at times.

    I really like Hyde. As a rookie, he out performed many of the 1st rounders, including our first pick Jones. Now, I still think Jones has plenty of upside to his career, so I wouldn't call him a bust by any means. This season, no. Nobody would give us a #1 for Hyde. But, that is because last season's draft was poor and this year it is much better. This season, there may be WRs making it into the 3rd round that are better than DeAndre Hopkins and Cordelle Patterson who were drafted late in the 1st in 2013. I think if you juggled the draft, and redid it, the 1st round would have a dozen new names in it, maybe 3 of our own: Bak, Lacy, and Hyde. Definitely Alonso (LB), Keenan Allen (3rd rd), and a guard I can't recall his name.

    Would Hyde make it to the 1st? Maybe not. Definitely he would be gone in the 2nd.
     
  25. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,921
    Ratings:
    +3,012
    Back to the title of this thread: We don't have as much money as you think now! :D

    BTW, El Guapo I too would be interested in your definition of "success".
     

Share This Page