craig Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 13 hours ago, R T said: This is kind of what I'm expecting. This draft has a lot of WR's that are going to be on rosters for years to come, but IMO doesn't have many that move the needle for the Packers in 2022 unless we are talking about as a returner. Does trading for a WR work well with the cap? A draft pick or a FA, the cap hit is small year one. (Even if it's a one-year guy, most aren't that expensive, and Gute will void-years the cap hit besides.). But if you trade for a guy, aren't you kinda stuck with the cap hit his salary calls for? Which isn't necessarily tiny if he's a couple of years into his contract? I'm just wondering if trading for a guy, with his contract in hand, doesn't have some challenges. Perhaps *IF* you do trade for a guy, Gute might almost need to extend him in order to be able to create a new contract and backload it? Who knows, perhaps some of that is why it's taking some time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R T Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 3 minutes ago, craig said: Does trading for a WR work well with the cap? A draft pick or a FA, the cap hit is small year one. (Even if it's a one-year guy, most aren't that expensive, and Gute will void-years the cap hit besides.). But if you trade for a guy, aren't you kinda stuck with the cap hit his salary calls for? Which isn't necessarily tiny if he's a couple of years into his contract? I'm just wondering if trading for a guy, with his contract in hand, doesn't have some challenges. Perhaps *IF* you do trade for a guy, Gute might almost need to extend him in order to be able to create a new contract and backload it? Who knows, perhaps some of that is why it's taking some time? There is no set answer to that, if it is a player on his rookie contract his base salary will naturally be very reasonable. On the other hand, if it is not a rookie contract it very well could have rapidly escalated base salaries built in. It is all going to be on an individual basis. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 1 hour ago, craig said: Does trading for a WR work well with the cap? A draft pick or a FA, the cap hit is small year one. (Even if it's a one-year guy, most aren't that expensive, and Gute will void-years the cap hit besides.). But if you trade for a guy, aren't you kinda stuck with the cap hit his salary calls for? Which isn't necessarily tiny if he's a couple of years into his contract? I'm just wondering if trading for a guy, with his contract in hand, doesn't have some challenges. Perhaps *IF* you do trade for a guy, Gute might almost need to extend him in order to be able to create a new contract and backload it? Who knows, perhaps some of that is why it's taking some time? We do have a healthy amount of cap right now. You could also restructure the contract after it comes in. What's nice is that the signing bonus paid for by the original team doesn't carry over. No real need for a true extension if you add void years, something the team is very comfortable doing. I doubt he gets moved, but last I checked Cooks has a 16m base salary. If we trade for him we could offer to convert, say, 10m into a signing bonus and add 3 void years. His cap hit this season would drop to 8.5m, and next year we'd have a dead cap hit of 7.5m. That said, I'd prefer a real extension for any WR on an expiring contract that we trade for. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 23, 2022 Author Share Posted March 23, 2022 Ross Uglem - People are not seriously suggesting Green Bay give up more to extend Tyreek Hill in a massive way than they just got for Davante Adams to avoid extending him in a massive way.... are they? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R T Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 2 minutes ago, Leader said: Ross Uglem - People are not seriously suggesting Green Bay give up more to extend Tyreek Hill in a massive way than they just got for Davante Adams to avoid extending him in a massive way.... are they? They're fans, of course they are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Striker Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 9 hours ago, Sandy said: We do have a healthy amount of cap right now. You could also restructure the contract after it comes in. What's nice is that the signing bonus paid for by the original team doesn't carry over. No real need for a true extension if you add void years, something the team is very comfortable doing. I doubt he gets moved, but last I checked Cooks has a 16m base salary. If we trade for him we could offer to convert, say, 10m into a signing bonus and add 3 void years. His cap hit this season would drop to 8.5m, and next year we'd have a dead cap hit of 7.5m. That said, I'd prefer a real extension for any WR on an expiring contract that we trade for. Another big concern for Cooks is his extensive concussion history. He has stayed healthy since going to Houston, but I'd imagine that's a red flag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 Nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 I’m sorry I just don’t understand this obsession with WR and I never will. Yeah, the Rams had all those receivers. By all those receivers I mean they had two. And Matthew Stafford. When you have Matthew Stafford you need more. When you have Rodgers you don’t. They also had the best DL of his generation and a top two cornerback in the league. They didn’t win because they had friggin receivers. Yes. We need to add two receivers. Probably three just in case. But adding some mega receiver is not important. And adding Hill is not going to happen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 23, 2022 Author Share Posted March 23, 2022 1 minute ago, Outpost31 said: And adding Hill is not going to happen. No Packer fans are seriously considering it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit Pack Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 Apparently MVS is visiting the Chiefs today!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 19 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Nice. Assuming my math is correct: 2022: $1.5M base salary, $1.77M signing bonus = $3.3M cap hit 2023: $5.2M base salary, $1.77M signing bonus = $7M cap hit 2024: $9M base salary, $1.77M signing bonus = $10.77M cap hit That's a pretty good deal for Green Bay. If Rasul Douglas continues what he did, the Packers get two very underpaid years and probably a third reasonable year. If he's awful, they can move on and save a good amount of money. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 Well, Hill is a Dolphin. Wonder if we call about Parker? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beekay414 Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 5 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Well, Hill is a Dolphin. Wonder if we call about Parker? Absolutely a must to at least call Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{Family Ghost} Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 (edited) 14 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Well, Hill is a Dolphin. Wonder if we call about Parker? Heard it was for five picks .. 2022 1st, 2nd, & 4th 2023 4th & 6th Edited March 23, 2022 by {Family Ghost} Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBobGray Posted March 23, 2022 Share Posted March 23, 2022 2 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Assuming my math is correct: 2022: $1.5M base salary, $1.77M signing bonus = $3.3M cap hit 2023: $5.2M base salary, $1.77M signing bonus = $7M cap hit 2024: $9M base salary, $1.77M signing bonus = $10.77M cap hit That's a pretty good deal for Green Bay. If Rasul Douglas continues what he did, the Packers get two very underpaid years and probably a third reasonable year. If he's awful, they can move on and save a good amount of money. I think your math is good, going off the tweet. Good value for the player honestly. I like Douglas quite a bit; I'll always be a fan of CBs who look to jump the route, and he's a better fit with Jaire than King was. Biggest issue I always had with the Jaire/King pairing was King being a Cover-3 prototype who could kind of play Cover-1 but was an easy target playing flat in Cover-2, while Jaire was elite in Cover-1 and Cover-2 but kind of wasted talent in Cover-3. No good way to sync your coverage up with those two guys on the field together, so either you constantly try to call hybrid coverages/Cover-6 or you're leaving King out to dry/wasting Jaire. Douglas shines playing flat in C2 because he'll house it on a bad throw, and he's got the film study dedication and reaction time with just enough physical talent that you can even ask him to shade hook/curl a bit and he'll still make it to the flat on time. But he's also 6'2" with 32-3/8" arms, so unlike a lot of C2 guys he's got the size and physicality to be tough when asked to just man his guy up. Putting him with Jaire gives you two guys who thrive in the same coverages, so you can build a coverage plan that actually builds on a singular skill set now. Meanwhile Stokes can play literally anything. I wasn't exactly down on him coming out, but he's still maybe my biggest miss in the last few years. Whoo boy is he a real one. Legitimately sticky in man, but has the size/speed combo to play vertical or flat in a zone and be a problem. If he could just play the ball he'd be Superman. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.