Jump to content

Random Packer News & Notes


Leader

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

The best option is, and remains to trade him.  And barring that, keep him and play him

You have to wonder if he could even pass a physical at this point.  He's probably stuck in GB this year .. let's hope he reaches a healthy streak here pretty soon.  Otherwise it's just a huge waste of a contract.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

You have to wonder if he could even pass a physical at this point.  He's probably stuck in GB this year .. let's hope he reaches a healthy streak here pretty soon.  Otherwise it's just a huge waste of a contract.

No ******* way he'd clear one in a trade right now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

First we learn that Bahk's knee is so bad that he can't practice, but don't worry. He doesn't need to practice. Now we learn that his knee is so bad that he can't play either, well maybe a few games, so long as there's plenty of "rest games" in between so his knee can recover. As much as I like Bahk, it's time to negotiate an injury settlement and release him with an injury designation. His knee isn't ever going to get any better. More likely it's going to degenerate over time. This is a rebuilding year. Let's see what Walker can do. By next April's draft we need to know if Walker is capable.

Him playing 75% of the games at 75% is still better than most players playing 100% of the games at 100%.  And at this point, it's a sunk cost.  There's a reason why the Packers didn't add any void years to his contract this past offseason when they needed additional cap space.  Let him play out this year, and then see if there's a market for him in the offseason.  You trade/cut him in the offseason, you save $21.5M.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Him playing 75% of the games at 75% is still better than most players playing 100% of the games at 100%.  And at this point, it's a sunk cost.  There's a reason why the Packers didn't add any void years to his contract this past offseason when they needed additional cap space.  Let him play out this year, and then see if there's a market for him in the offseason.  You trade/cut him in the offseason, you save $21.5M.

Let's hope he plays 75% of the games. So far he's played 50% of the games.

Edited by Mr. Fussnputz
Added a thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, skibrett15 said:

yeah I think it's a long shot but much more likely if they get part of this year too.

Nobody is taking just that next year deal at this point.

Odds are so small they really aren't worth discussing. Bakh will play here this year. 

Next year I honestly think coming back here on a re-worked deal or retirement are going to be his only options. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, CWood21 said:

...it's a sunk cost....

Yes.  It happens.  It's the National Injury League.  Every deal has injury risk.  Every good player gets signing-bonus, and every contender uses signing-bonus that pushes out cap hits.  

It can't be undone.  I don't blame Bakhti, nor expect Packers to get out from the cap hit.  

*IF* we get some games from him, be glad for whatever.  If we don't, too bad. 

Edited by craig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...