Random Packer News & Notes

[deathstar]

8 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

She's got to answer "My opponent played very well today. It was a great match" 8 times and then the 7 digit check lands. I'm all for advancing mental health in any way that it can be done, but "I'm having a bad mental health day" can't be a get out of jail free card. 

Ok? Im not sure your last sentence is logically consistent.

[gopackgo972]

4 hours ago, packfanfb said:

....or we just win the game by 10 because we have Julio and Adams regardless of whether those plays happen or not. 😁

 

 

That works too!

[thrILL!]

6 hours ago, mikemike778 said:

I've always said that trading for Julio is utterly unrealistic. 

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2021/6/1/22463561/can-the-packers-afford-julio-jones-salary-cap-space

Our old FF homie Justo wrote about how it's at least a little bit realistic (albeit unlikely).

[coachbuns]

12 hours ago, deathstar said:

In hopes that this is a genuine misunderstanding, here is her own statement:

 

Thanks for the news clip and now understand a little more of the situation.  Not quite the situation I thought I heard/imagined.

[mikemike778]

5 hours ago, thrILL! said:

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2021/6/1/22463561/can-the-packers-afford-julio-jones-salary-cap-space

Our old FF homie Justo wrote about how it's at least a little bit realistic (albeit unlikely).

That explains how it is realistic in 2021

But our cap space in 2022 is the worst in the league and we have kicked a huge amount of money into 2022 already.  The article's suggestion of how we do it involved kicking another huge amount of money into 2022. 

Which goes back to my original question. You probably have to tank 2022 to sign Julio. But if we are rebuilding in 2022 then does it really matter. If we aren't competing in 2022 anyway, what does a few more cuts/non-signings matter. 

 

[VonKarman]

1 hour ago, mikemike778 said:

That explains how it is realistic in 2021

But our cap space in 2022 is the worst in the league and we have kicked a huge amount of money into 2022 already.  The article's suggestion of how we do it involved kicking another huge amount of money into 2022. 

Which goes back to my original question. You probably have to tank 2022 to sign Julio. But if we are rebuilding in 2022 then does it really matter. If we aren't competing in 2022 anyway, what does a few more cuts/non-signings matter. 

 

You'd have to basically cut/trade Z., Preston, Rodgers, not resign anyone who where to make 7M+ (including Davante and Tonyan) and restructure Kenny and Bakh.

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, deathstar said:

Ok? Im not sure your last sentence is logically consistent.

It absolutely is. 

"Mental Health" can't become equivalent to "I don't want to do this." An effort needs to be made to adhere to Neuro normative standards. 

[TransientTexan]

2 hours ago, mikemike778 said:

You probably have to tank 2022 to sign Julio.

Not necessarily. But you'd have to exercise just about every single possible method to clear space.

Assuming $0 rollover and a $16.2m hit for Julio in 2022, they'd probably be about -49.7m over the 2022 limit.

cutting P.Smith/Lowry/Turner clears 18.1m. restructure Clark/Bak could add up to 17.4m max. extending Alexander,Z.Smith, and Amos could probably clear 15.3m max if structured to give lowest possible 2022 cap hits. That'd leave you with about $1.1m space.

then, to get the funds to re-sign Adams & Tonyan (who could collectively be as low as 8.5m hit in 2022), you'd have to restructure or extend Rodgers. 

of course, I shudder to think what the 2023 cap would look like if you did all that. and I doubt it would be worth it. GB offense was already #1 in the league. You'd reach diminishing returns and be chaining yourself to a bunch of old vets. If they want to go all-in, I'd rather they use the Julio money for something else.  

 

[AlexGreen#20]

7 hours ago, thrILL! said:

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2021/6/1/22463561/can-the-packers-afford-julio-jones-salary-cap-space

Our old FF homie Justo wrote about how it's at least a little bit realistic (albeit unlikely).

Yeah, because Julio Jones is going to play for his new team on a 3/37 contract with inadequate guaranteed money to keep him locked in. Come on guys. 

Julio is going to demand a new deal around like 4/100. If Julio was going to play at 3/37, he would already be on a different team. 

This is such a damn hard trade to pull off because:

The Falcons need to be compensated adequately for eating 23 million in dead cap space. Yes it's split over 2 years, and yes it saves 38 million over the next three years, but paying 23 million dollars to make one of the best to ever do it go play for somebody else is a tough pill to swallow.

The receiving team has to be comfortable with writing a market setting WR contract, very similar to the Mack trade, to a 32 year old receiver. That's ugly. 

In combination with the previous passage, Julio only wants to go to a contender, and the Falcons front office (at least before the Shannon Sharpe call) had promised to do right by him. Problem being, all the contenders lack cap space.

Even if we say that Julio wants 4/100 with only 30% guaranteed up front, and you structure the base salary cap hits at 10/15/20/25, and then you restructure, the entirety of the year 1 base salary, you still have a year 1 cap hit of almost 11 million dollars. Years 2/3/4 then have cap hits of 24/30/35 with outs of 30/20/10. 

This isn't an easy trade to pull off.

 

 

[deathstar]

2 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

It absolutely is. 

"Mental Health" can't become equivalent to "I don't want to do this." An effort needs to be made to adhere to Neuro normative standards. 

I don’t want to do this can mean a lot of things and can be a completely reasonable response.

If doing something means someone, for example, will receive a third degree burn it’s totally reasonable for them to say I don’t want to do this.

And as we are learning about mental health certain situations can be just as damaging to a person. In which case them saying I don’t want to do this is totally reasonable.

[AlexGreen#20]

48 minutes ago, deathstar said:

I don’t want to do this can mean a lot of things and can be a completely reasonable response.

If doing something means someone, for example, will receive a third degree burn it’s totally reasonable for them to say I don’t want to do this.

And as we are learning about mental health certain situations can be just as damaging to a person. In which case them saying I don’t want to do this is totally reasonable.

A completely ridiculous comparison considering she's been interviewed a thousand times before. 

We all have parts of our job we don't want to do. Being annoyed by work isn't an assault on your mental health. It's part of being an adult.

[mikemike778]

2 hours ago, TransientTexan said:

Not necessarily. But you'd have to exercise just about every single possible method to clear space.

Assuming $0 rollover and a $16.2m hit for Julio in 2022, they'd probably be about -49.7m over the 2022 limit.

cutting P.Smith/Lowry/Turner clears 18.1m. restructure Clark/Bak could add up to 17.4m max. extending Alexander,Z.Smith, and Amos could probably clear 15.3m max if structured to give lowest possible 2022 cap hits. That'd leave you with about $1.1m space.

then, to get the funds to re-sign Adams & Tonyan (who could collectively be as low as 8.5m hit in 2022), you'd have to restructure or extend Rodgers. 

of course, I shudder to think what the 2023 cap would look like if you did all that. and I doubt it would be worth it. GB offense was already #1 in the league. You'd reach diminishing returns and be chaining yourself to a bunch of old vets. If they want to go all-in, I'd rather they use the Julio money for something else.  

 

 

You would have to tank 2022.

You haven't factored in Julio Jones' 2021 cap hit (which would add 5m to the cap burden to 2022), you need money to carry into the season,  think that gives us about 35 players under contract. The cap going up means new contracts cost more. Think we still need more money for 2021 which is going to need to come from 2022. You would need to clear far far more than just 55m.

Its do-able but it only makes sense if you have already written off 2021 as a rebuild year. Which I don't hate.  

 

[packfanfb]

7 minutes ago, mikemike778 said:

Its do-able but it only makes sense if you have already written off 2021 as a rebuild year. Which I don't hate.  

 

You mean 2022. As I alluded to before, a move for Julio would make the most sense if you're still planning to move Rodgers next off-season. You dangle the Julio move to 12 to get him back this season, go for it all, knowing it's basically a one and done thing. Packers' cap issues virtually go away if 12 is dealt next March. 

If you're still trying to keep 12 long term, you could still nab Julio for one season but you'd have to restructure 12's contract to reduce his cap hit substantially this year and probably next year as well. Either way, Julio would be a one-year thing.

Edited June 6, 2021 by packfanfb

[packfanfb]

In non Osaka/Julio news, we've now seen IG posts from St. Brown, Lazard, and Funchess all confirming their pending arrival in GB for minicamp.

Just waiting on MVS (assuming he'll be there) and Davante. 

[Refugee]

8 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

In non Osaka/Julio news, we've now seen IG posts from St. Brown, Lazard, and Funchess all confirming their pending arrival in GB for minicamp.

Just waiting on MVS (assuming he'll be there) and Davante. 

Well that and to see if they’ll be catching passes from 10 or 12. It will be good to have the WRs there to really get the offense rolling. I always cheer for the long shots this time of year but not that excited to hear about Gaithers and Winfree highlights.