2018 Salary Cap Analysis

[Mondio]

You don't trade the best player in the game. That's the most regressive idea I've heard as far as the Packers' roster is concerned.

but think of all the picks we'd have, and considering a QB like Rodgers has come along like twice in the past 20 years just think of the possibilities...

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Funny how some assume "top picks" always equate to "great players". Now if someone said, we will give you "5 players of your choice from our roster for AR", I might be on board with that.

 

[Dantés]

but think of all the picks we'd have, and considering a QB like Rodgers has come along like twice in the past 20 years just think of the possibilities...

It's how the Patriots traded Brady and it catapulted them to all their Super Bowls.

 

[gbgary]

You don't trade the best player in the game. That's the most regressive idea I've heard as far as the Packers' roster is concerned.

i'm not saying do it, and cleveland is the only partner it would make sense to trade with. i'm just saying if the Packers were so inclined (and i'm 100% sure they're not) that there will never be a better time than now. Rodgers' age and collar bone, Packers talent gap and cap situation w/aging stars, cleveland's tremendous cap space and 2018 draft picks, are the factors to consider. the Packers are facing disaster as it is when Rodgers retires so if they made a preemptive strike like this to get a number one qb, wr, cb/edge, and eliminate their cap problems, i would totally understand. as for "there are no-guarantees" on the picks...are there any guarantees that this team, with all it's problems, is going to do anything in the next 4-5 years as the Rodgers window closes completely?

hell, cle would probably trade him to min anyway. lol

 

[OldSchool101]

Draft picks are unknown quantities. We’ve all seen it.
I think all of us would agree that QB is the single most impactful position on any team. Trading a player that is still in his prime, the best player currently on the team, arguably the best player in the league and possibly in contention as a nominee for the best player ever to play the game in trade for a couple of relative unknowns doesn’t make a lick of sense to me.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

"Hi Aaron, this is Gute. First, congrats on your new Girlfriend Danica Patrick. Second, hope you two like Cleveland, we just traded you".

 

[gbgary]

"Hi Aaron, this is Gute. First, congrats on your new Girlfriend Danica Patrick. Second, hope you two like Cleveland, we just traded you".

i bet that call to hershel walker sounded kinda like that.

 

[OldSchool101]

"Hi Aaron, this is Gute. First, congrats on your new Girlfriend Danica Patrick. Second, hope you two like Cleveland, we just traded you".

Just when we finally get a supermodel on board to root for GB. We trade her!
Total Ted Thompson move!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

i bet that call to hershel walker sounded kinda like that.

Or John Hadl. Surprisingly, I think Hadl was close to the same age as Rogers, when he was traded to the Packers.

 

[OldSchool101]

Or John Hadl. Surprisingly, I think Hadl was close to the same age as Rogers, when he was traded to the Packers.

Wow Hadl was impressive too. 9 TD’s 29INT’s.
I’m glad I don’t remember him we should’ve sent that trade back with a thank you letter and a pipe bomb.

 

[ARPackFan]

Clay - Packers have the upper hand as there is no dead money. $11 million is way to high. Serious cut in pay with maybe 3 years for $12 - 15 m or just let him walk. I just think he can be replaced for a much lower number.
Nelson/Cobb - I would keep Randell Cobb over Jordy Nelson - slightly cheaper and 4 years younger. I can't see Cobb taking a pay cut as he still has more value in FA than Jordy at this point.

 

[Dantés]

i'm not saying do it, and cleveland is the only partner it would make sense to trade with. i'm just saying if the Packers were so inclined (and i'm 100% sure they're not) that there will never be a better time than now. Rodgers' age and collar bone, Packers talent gap and cap situation w/aging stars, cleveland's tremendous cap space and 2018 draft picks, are the factors to consider. the Packers are facing disaster as it is when Rodgers retires so if they made a preemptive strike like this to get a number one qb, wr, cb/edge, and eliminate their cap problems, i would totally understand. as for "there are no-guarantees" on the picks...are there any guarantees that this team, with all it's problems, is going to do anything in the next 4-5 years as the Rodgers window closes completely?

hell, cle would probably trade him to min anyway. lol

I think fans are grossly overestimating the talent gap based on what the team did with Hundley.

Yes, they went 3-7 in Brett Hundley starts. In those 7 losses, this is what they were getting out of the QB:

125/223 for 1,275 yards, 5.7 YPA, 56% completion, 5 TD, 11 INT, 2 rush TD, 4 Fumbles, 22 sacks

Basically, he was among the dregs of the league in every statistical category. If you just told me that Team X had QB play like that ^ and lost about twice as much as they won, I would have no idea what to think about the rest of the roster. It's near impossible to win when that's what you're getting out of the most important position.

All we really know at this point is that the team is a contender with elite QB play and can't overcome horrendous QB play. We don't really know much about how the roster would do with anything in between. Personally, I think with league average QB play they're an 8-10 win team. With Rodgers, they're a SB contender.

 

[gbgary]

Or John Hadl. Surprisingly, I think Hadl was close to the same age as Rogers, when he was traded to the Packers.

hadl was done. i don't know what the Packers were thinking back then. walker was dallas' best player and still had a couple of good years left but he was wasn't at his peak.

 

[gbgary]

Personally, I think with league average QB play they're an 8-10 win team. With Rodgers, they're a SB contender.

we'll never know for 2017...it's the lost year. for 2018 everyone will be another year older and will have taken another year's worth of physical beatings. there are more issues than they can fix in one year so 2018 will be a lost year. that makes 2019 a contender-type year maybe (with a little luck)...but again everyone's another year older and will have taken another year's worth of beatings.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

hadl was done. i don't know what the Packers were thinking back then. walker was dallas' best player and still had a couple of good years left but he was wasn't at his peak.

From what I remember reading, was a desperation move by Dan Devine to save his job. He resigned that year and took a great job as the HC at Notre Dame....go figure.

Devine traded two 1st round picks, two 2nd round picks, and a 3rd round pick for the 34-year-old quarterback. Meanwhile, the Rams used the picks acquired in the trade to draft players who would help them dominate the NFC West in the 1970s.

 

[PackerDNA]

The Walker trade is always the example of a bad deal, but you could make a solid case that the Hadl trade was worse.

 

[PackerDNA]

we'll never know for 2017...it's the lost year. for 2018 everyone will be another year older and will have taken another year's worth of physical beatings. there are more issues than they can fix in one year so 2018 will be a lost year. that makes 2019 a contender-type year maybe (with a little luck)...but again everyone's another year older and will have taken another year's worth of beatings.

Put me down for 2013 being a lost year as well. IMO, '13 and '14 were the zenith for this team.

 

[Dantés]

we'll never know for 2017...it's the lost year. for 2018 everyone will be another year older and will have taken another year's worth of physical beatings. there are more issues than they can fix in one year so 2018 will be a lost year. that makes 2019 a contender-type year maybe (with a little luck)...but again everyone's another year older and will have taken another year's worth of beatings.

Respectfully, I think that take is garbage.

Every roster will have issues on it that cannot all be adequately addressed to fans' satisfaction in one offseason. SB contenders are not perfect rosters. They're just rosters that are good and lucky enough to make it all the way. The Packers could easily be one of them in 2018.

 

[gbgary]

was a desperation move

yup...hoped they could catch lightning in a bottle and get one or two years out of him.

 

[PackerDNA]

I agree with Dante's; a few tweaks and decent luck with injuries- especially Rodgers- and I see no reason why the Packers can't be legit SB contenders in 2018.

 

[gbgary]

I agree with Dante's; a few tweaks and decent luck with injuries- especially Rodgers- and I see no reason why the Packers can't be legit SB contenders in 2018.

i hope you guys are right but there are issues at every position other than rb and dl. you've got a learning curve on d that they'll have to overcome too. i just don't see it. it's as close to a rebuilding year as it can get without actually calling it that. oh...and that schedule they'll have to play. yikes!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

i hope you guys are right but there are issues at every position other than rb and dl. you've got a learning curve on d that they'll have to overcome too. i just don't see it. it's as close to a rebuilding year as it can get without actually calling it that. oh...and that schedule they'll have to play. yikes!

Never really know how good or bad opponents will be the next year. While I'm not excited about playing on the road against the Rams, Patriot and Seahawks, ask the Vikings how they feel about playing the same schedule as us, but get the Eagles (we get Washington) and the Saints (we get Falcons). Lions get the Panthers and Cowboys and the Bears get the Giants and Buccaneers.

Out of all the AFC divisions, the East might be considered the easiest opponents. The NFC West doesn't scare me much either.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

another interesting offseason decision for the Packers will be if they pick up the 5th year option on Damarious Randall. I think it will be somewhere in the neighborhood of $7+ M.

 

[Dantés]

another interesting offseason decision for the Packers will be if they pick up the 5th year option on Damarious Randall. I think it will be somewhere in the neighborhood of $7+ M.

But wouldn't apply until 2019, when Cobb and Nelson are off the books.

 

[gbgary]

another interesting offseason decision for the Packers will be if they pick up the 5th year option on Damarious Randall. I think it will be somewhere in the neighborhood of $7+ M.

that's a decision for next off season. although if he improves as much next year as he did this year they'll keep him.