2023 Rookie Minicamp / OTAs / Training Camp

[Refugee]

14 minutes ago, thrILL! said:

Paying to have his number embroidered would’ve pushed us over the cap. 

Tightwad Ted not having such luxurious exuberance. 

[CWood21]

15 hours ago, NFLGURU said:

Are the Packers really going into the season with Carlson as their kicker?

That's going to cost us.  

Ask Vikings' fans how much they're kicking themselves for getting rid of Daniel Carlson too soon?  They dumped him after a measly 4 FGs, and his FG% since then is 89.9%.

[CWood21]

On 8/22/2023 at 10:20 PM, squire12 said:

Agreed.  

QB:  only if Love busts hard

RB/WR/TE:  don't see GB using a 1st

IOL:  again, don't see it

DL:  certainly possible

Edge:  unlikely with Gary, LVN, Enagbare

ILB: don't see it with Walker and campbell 

Safety:  possible if an elite is there

CB: possible, but Jaire, Douglas, Stokes, Valentine makes that pretty set

IOL isn't a FRP-value position, but it's certainly a need.  Myers is almost assuredly going to walk, and I think Runyan is probably going to outprice himself after the season even if he's not great.  And I think you're underestimating the "need" at CB beyond this upcoming season.

[Lodestar]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

IOL isn't a FRP-value position, but it's certainly a need.  Myers is almost assuredly going to walk, and I think Runyan is probably going to outprice himself after the season even if he's not great.  And I think you're underestimating the "need" at CB beyond this upcoming season.

Myers is under contract for two more seasons. Strangely, this isn't the first time I've seen a poster talk about losing him in the offseason.

[squire12]

6 hours ago, CWood21 said:

IOL isn't a FRP-value position, but it's certainly a need.  Myers is almost assuredly going to walk, and I think Runyan is probably going to outprice himself after the season even if he's not great.  And I think you're underestimating the "need" at CB beyond this upcoming season.

The discussion is on 2024 draft and first round pick.  I you think GB would take an IOL with its first round pick?

CB certainly could be a need in 2025 as Jaire, Stokes are the  CB with game experience of note under contract.... but OT would have Tom as the "OT" with any game experience under contract

 

 

[Old Guy]

17 hours ago, TheEagle said:

What makes you think Jones hasn't gotten good reviews? I saw three practices, and I thought he looked good. He seems to have done well overall in 1 on 1 pass rush drills.

You actually mis-read what he posted. He said Jones HAS gotten good reviews. 

[Old Guy]

17 hours ago, craig said:

11 OT's have average salaries (cap hits) ≥$18/year.  19 are ≥$15/year.  So $21 isn't crazy.  But yeah, those include signing bonus dollars.  

I had suggested that rather than talking about the $19 sunk-cost from signing bonus, the Packers would really only consider the $21/1 that Bak would actual cost next year. 

No, they shouldn't! They can only spend salary cap dollars once. You can't pretend his 19 million in cap charges aren't real or don't affect team building. You don't compound that by paying him 21 million salary on top of that. He'd be the top paid T by cap charges by well over 10 million dollars. 

[craig]

Old, it's fine.  If it's a no-brainer that $21/1 for a hypothetically top-end LT is unacceptable, that's fine.  I agree that either $21/1 or a restructure/extension would both be unwise... unless this year looks so great that 2024 is immediately a prime super-bowl year.  

That $19 is a sunk cost regardless of where you spend the other $21.  The $19, that's water under the bridge.  The Packers question is how to best utilize the other $21. 

Whether the $19 lists as dead cap, or gets factored into a Bakhti restructure, it's still the reality that Gute needs to work around.   

Obviously the Packers won't spend that $21 on either Bakhti or any other individual guy.  But the Packers real question is how to best utilize the money. 

1. Maybe that $21 is just needed to get under the cap? 
2. Spend on extending younger guys?  Gary, Nijman, Runyan, Dillon, maybe early extensions on guys like Myers or Stokes or Slaton? 
3. Spend on QB replacement, if Love goes bad?  [Perish that thought!].
4. OLB?  If Preston is done, and VanNess isn't really the quick pass-rusher you might want?
5. Spread it around?  Safety and whatever other groups emerge as lacking? 
6. Put as much as possible into deep savings for later?   Love and our young guys are hopefully all going to do great, and in almost no time Love and Quay/Wyatt/Watson/Doubs/Tom/Rhyan/Walker will all be pushing towards massively inflationary 2nd deals, and we'll be capped out to keep them all?  

Packers are only now approaching a point where they are getting out from under cap trouble.  But, with Love approaching pay-dirt, and with all of the high draft picks in 22 and 23 and upcoming 24 drafts, hopefully NOT many of them busting, the NFL wheel turns so quickly.  We'll probably be walking right back into extreme cap pressure in just a couple of years.   

So I'd like to see Gute save up more in unspent-cap to carry forward for future costs, if possible.  And I'd like to avoid deals that push tons of cap-hit or void money into 2-3-4-5 years out.  Which is why I'm not super buzzed about restructure Bakhti to push cap costs into the future.... unless things look so great this year that the rebuild is over and we're immediately back in full-Nowacrat mode for next year, where keeping Bakhti might be desirable.  (As with Clifton for the last super bowl).  

 

[craig]

Often I look at present or next-year-cap.  I think Ball and Gute need to be charting out multiple years ahead to anticipate future extensions.  

[vegas492]

15 hours ago, Old Guy said:

We let Bulaga go and many folks on message boards were pissed. I can't remember a time we gave and offensive lineman 30+ a big contract. 

 

No, we did not let Bulaga "go".  His contract expired.  And we held him together with duct tape.  'Let go" implies that we released him, which did not happen.  He was a free agent.

And we did pay and play Chad Clifton until he was ready to retire at age 36.  He played at age 35.  He went to he Pro Bowl at age 34.  

Looks like in 2010, we paid Clifton, at age 34, a 3 year, $19.6M deal.  In terms of his contracts, those two years that he played represented his second most money in a season (first was 2004 when he signed deal 2), and the fourth most amount of money that he made in a season.  

I'm unsure of where that contract ranked in terms of elite tackles at that time, but it was 14 years ago.

Saying that we do not have a history of paying aged and injured tackles top dollar is simply not true.  We have.  

The issue is that we haven't been in a situation where we've had to in quite some time because of just how good Cliffy was and Bakh is currently.

[Old Guy]

2 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

No, we did not let Bulaga "go".  His contract expired.  And we held him together with duct tape.  'Let go" implies that we released him, which did not happen.  He was a free agent.

And we did pay and play Chad Clifton until he was ready to retire at age 36.  He played at age 35.  He went to he Pro Bowl at age 34.  

Looks like in 2010, we paid Clifton, at age 34, a 3 year, $19.6M deal.  In terms of his contracts, those two years that he played represented his second most money in a season (first was 2004 when he signed deal 2), and the fourth most amount of money that he made in a season.  

I'm unsure of where that contract ranked in terms of elite tackles at that time, but it was 14 years ago.

Saying that we do not have a history of paying aged and injured tackles top dollar is simply not true.  We have.  

The issue is that we haven't been in a situation where we've had to in quite some time because of just how good Cliffy was and Bakh is currently.

We didn't offer him a contract, so we let him go. 

How good is Bak currently? We don't know and we sure as heck can't count on him too far into the future. Wrong side of 30 with a bum knee is not good in the NFL. 

[vegas492]

3 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

We didn't offer him a contract, so we let him go. 

How good is Bak currently? We don't know and we sure as heck can't count on him too far into the future. Wrong side of 30 with a bum knee is not good in the NFL. 

When you are "let go" of a contract, it implies that you had a contract and was released.

That factually was not the case at all.  His contract expired.  There was no contract binding him to Green Bay or vice versa, which means he was not "let go".  

How good is Bakh?  Are you kidding?  You saw him play last year, right?   You've seen where he has said this is the first off-season in 3 years where he could actually train and get stronger to get through the season as opposed to rehabbing injuries.   

That this is the hill you are going to die on is pretty cringe worthy.  

[Old Guy]

3 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

When you are "let go" of a contract, it implies that you had a contract and was released.

That factually was not the case at all.  His contract expired.  There was no contract binding him to Green Bay or vice versa, which means he was not "let go".  

How good is Bakh?  Are you kidding?  You saw him play last year, right?   You've seen where he has said this is the first off-season in 3 years where he could actually train and get stronger to get through the season as opposed to rehabbing injuries.   

That this is the hill you are going to die on is pretty cringe worthy.  

Until he can prove he can play on a consistent basis all those traits mean nothing. The best ability is availability. He's simply not shown us he will be available. 

Until then you can't count on him. One thing that is 100% certain, he's not helping us by not playing. 

I'm pulling for him but until then, I wouldn't be counting on him too much.

Edited August 24, 2023 by Old Guy

[vegas492]

Just now, Old Guy said:

Until he can prove he can play on a consistent basis all those traits mean nothing. The best ability is availability. He's simply not shown us he will be available. 

Yeah, and I just had to let Scarlett Johansson go, along with Elizabeth Hurley.  

[craig]

Vegas is correct, we went through years with Clifton playing but not practicing; with Bulaga playing but not practicing.  Didn't Tauscher do that for a year or two near the end also?  It's a given that Bakhti will not be a full-time practice guy for the duration of his career.  The question is whether he can still be good on Sundays without the practice.  Last year he was, and as we've seen with both Clifton and Bulaga, tackles who don't practice much can still play variably well on Sundays.  

Bakhti's next contract/restructure will be informed by this season.  Maybe he'll play 17 games, maybe he'll get hurt and play 3, who knows now?  Maybe the Packers win 11 games, Love looks like a franchise QB, and we'll approach 2024 full Nowacrat; maybe they'll lose 11 games, and they approach 2024 full Buildican.  Who knows now?  Time will tell, for both Packers and Bakhti.

Obviously the only way Bakhti hypothetically comes back is *IF* hypothetically all of FOUR things are true:  1) he stays healthy and projects well; 2) if the team is very good and Gute goes full Nowacrat for 2024; 3) Gute prefers to invest $$ in Bakhti versus other ways, and 4) Bakhti prefers a Packers extension over other possibilities.  Probable, absolutely not.  Modestly possible, yes.    

 

Edited August 24, 2023 by craig