Bakhtiari to Jets?

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm not sure if we have any pressing needs that warrant a FA splash. I wouldn't mind a 3rd tier OL for depth, but our big deficiency is RB and S. Everywhere else is young and ascending. I'm also not sure who's a pending FA that would legitimately help our team.

I won't be surprised to see Gute address all 3 (OL, RB and S) in free agency and the draft. Savage is playing better, but for how long and how much will he want? If they keep Aaron Jones, they should be fine with a mid round rookie and picking up a journey man FA RB.

 

[mradtke66]

I won't be surprised to see Gute address all 3 (OL, RB and S) in free agency and the draft. Savage is playing better, but for how long and how much will he want? If they keep Aaron Jones, they should be fine with a mid round rookie and picking up a journey man FA RB.

I don't even pretend to know who we'll draft, I don't have the time to watch all my preferred college team, let alone several of them....

RB: Keep Jones, assume Wilson has his year 2 jump, draft a rookie. Sufficient, no need for an outside FA. Especially since most RBs are beat to death and over-used.

S: I think we agree that Savage is fine, but we need more. I'd keep 1-2 of the other guys currently at Safety; Owens? Ford? Both? Someone else? I honestly don't feel confident in my assessment who's the next best back there, and add a rookie. Probably sufficient, but due to the league tending to under-value the position, you might get someone good but cheap here.

OL: Find an old-ish journeyman to be the interior swing-backup. Draft a tentative interior player or two. Ideally the rookies play well enough to make the journeyman expendable and you cut him to get to 53.

And then you're free to draft BPA at impact positions for most of the draft.

 

[tynimiller]

I won't be surprised to see Gute address all 3 (OL, RB and S) in free agency and the draft. Savage is playing better, but for how long and how much will he want? If they keep Aaron Jones, they should be fine with a mid round rookie and picking up a journey man FA RB.

I suspect Savage at most is getting around $6M a year. If you could get him to sign in that $4M - $6M a year range on a two or three you would need to think on it. Not a very expensive contract, position of need, he has played much better this year and closing out the year than last...

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I suspect Savage at most is getting around $6M a year. If you could get him to sign in that $4M - $6M a year range on a two or three you would need to think on it. Not a very expensive contract, position of need, he has played much better this year and closing out the year than last...

I hate to sound redundant, but Savage is just another player that I would prefer seeing get very little guaranteed money, a low base salary, with plenty of incentives to earn $6M+ Need to keep these players hungry and willing to play ******* every snap.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Need to keep these players hungry and willing to play ******* every snap.

When did the words "hard on" become censored? JFC

 

[tynimiller]

I hate to sound redundant, but Savage is just another player that I would prefer seeing get very little guaranteed money, a low base salary, with plenty of incentives to earn $6M+ Need to keep these players hungry and willing to play ******* every snap.

You cannot give JAG (your term not mine) incentives in the $5M range...poor business.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You cannot give JAG (your term not mine) incentives in the $5M range...poor business.

Wasn't calling him a JAG in that sense at all. Was saying "He is just another EXAMPLE of a player I don't want to see the Packers overpay and lock-up with guaranteed money. Now if he plays like one (A JAG), he should only earn $4M or less. However, if he has a tremendous year, he should get paid for it.

 

[milani]

I won't be surprised to see Gute address all 3 (OL, RB and S) in free agency and the draft. Savage is playing better, but for how long and how much will he want? If they keep Aaron Jones, they should be fine with a mid round rookie and picking up a journey man FA RB.

Wonder if Rodgers could talk the Jets into trading for Bahk. They could certainly use him IF he can play. RB is a position that can hurt you if you have injuries. Depth is important. Jones missed a lot of action this season. Dillon hung tough until a few weeks ago. I do not want to see a 2010 repeat if our feature back goes out in Week One again. We got Starks much later in the season which helped but as we learned later he was not a back that could stay on the field for 16 games with all those carries.

 

[tynimiller]

Wasn't calling him a JAG in that sense at all. Was saying "He is just another EXAMPLE of a player I don't want to see the Packers overpay and lock-up with guaranteed money. Now if he plays like one (A JAG), he should only earn $4M or less. However, if he has a tremendous year, he should get paid for it.

Looking at a few 27 year old-ish safeties contracts last year a few to bring up....and I believe the $6M may be tick high unless Gute does one year...and even then tick high likely.

Steelers signed Keanu Neal this last year to a two year $4.25M deal...he had right now has almost identical career snaps, games started and such as Savage...albeit less INTs. Either way similar age and such, just one year later for Savage than Neal was. ($2.125M/Yr)

Steelers also signed Killebrew a safety with next to no starts and didn't play many defensive downs this year or past years to a two year $2M type deal (He is older at 30 years old now though). ($1M/Yr)

Jordan Whitehead - Jets signed him to a 2 year $14.5M deal ($7.25M/Yr) type deal and has been very productive. I'd argue he is the tier Savage can be but isn't consistently.

MJ Stewart - Signed a two year deal for $6M ($3M/Yr) with the Texans this past offseason and he is not the tier player Savage is but is similar to the bad Savage times we have. He has only started 10 games over like six years.

Adrian Phillips - (Older comp as well) Signed a three year deal for $12.75 couple years back after starting well for the Patriots. He however before that only had one year of starting vs Savage has all the time while healthy really. ($4.25M/Yr)

Vonn Bell - Signed a 3 year $22.5M deal with the Panthers after having a similar snap and starts to Savage but arguably available more and slightly better Safety but by how much who knows - I say like Whitehead comp this is what Savage can be and is at times... ($7.5M/Yr)

Eric Murray - Two year $8M deal with the Texans and in 2020 and 2021 was their main starter...before they gave deal. ($4M/Yr)

Nick Scott - got a 3 year $12M deal with the Bengals after essentially being a starter in his final year at LAR in 2022. ($4M/Yr)

JT Gray - got a 3 year $10.1M deal with the Saints and he's never been a starter... ($3.3M/Yr)


If I want Savage back I am starting at offering something in the range of three years $13M with like $6M guaranteed or so.

 

[mradtke66]

I hate to sound redundant, but Savage is just another player that I would prefer seeing get very little guaranteed money, a low base salary, with plenty of incentives to earn $6M+

The problem with this approach is the good ole prisoner's dilemma. If we don't offer sufficient guaranteed money, another team likely will.

If we are reluctant to offer sufficient guaranteed money as a rule, it'll be harder to keep our own good free agents. It'll be next to impossible to attract outside free agents.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The problem with this approach is the good ole prisoner's dilemma. If we don't offer sufficient guaranteed money, another team likely will.

If we are reluctant to offer sufficient guaranteed money as a rule, it'll be harder to keep our own good free agents. It'll be next to impossible to attract outside free agents.

Good points.

Would love to see a breakdown of each teams guaranteed money paid out on contracts over the years. Maybe one of the cap sites has it?

 

[mradtke66]

Good points.

Would love to see a breakdown of each teams guaranteed money paid out on contracts over the years. Maybe one of the cap sites has it?

https://overthecap.com/contracts breaks it down pretty well.

The top 8 safeties have 20M+ in guaranteed money. The top 25 or so (hard to count) have 10M+. Savage is currently in that pool at around 22nd with 12.5M total guaranteed.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

https://overthecap.com/contracts breaks it down pretty well.

The top 8 safeties have 20M+ in guaranteed money. The top 25 or so (hard to count) have 10M+. Savage is currently in that pool at around 22nd with 12.5M total guaranteed.

Right but I was referring to a historical breakdown for each year, as to how much each team has guaranteed in their contracts over the years. Also, to correlate that with the wins and losses would add some intrigue to it.

 

[mradtke66]

Right but I was referring to a historical breakdown for each year, as to how much each team has guaranteed in their contracts over the years. Also, to correlate that with the wins and losses would add some intrigue to it.

I bet it won't be as direct as you'd like it to be in some ways and absurdly direct in others.

My suspicion has long been, for example, that paying quarterbacks a lot of money or having them chew up a lot of cap isn't a problem. What tends to hurt you is having a good quarterback. It's a correlation vs causation situation.

My premise presumes drafting is the most important way to build a team. This can be debated, of course.

When you find a great quarterback, you win more games. In the case of a rookie, he will tend to not win much in year 1 or 2 and start to win more in years 3 and 4. Once he demonstrates that greatness, say by winning a playoff game, you're suddenly drafting late. Right now, the Packers are drafting 25th. Had they lost in the wildcard, 19th. Had they missed the playoffs entirely with their same 9-8 record, as early as 14th. Had they lost the Lions in week 17, as early as 12th.

You're drafting later. You drafting success just got harder. A quick google say 1-10, you have a 55% chance of getting a Pro Bowler. 21-30 has only a 33% chance. The two Super Bowl teams have only a 25% chance.

This later drafting is what hurts teams and makes it harder to sustain success or get over the hump. It just tends to happen the same time that those quarterback start getting the big bucks. And the better they do, the better their teams tend to do. So they draft later AND reward the quarterback with more money.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I bet it won't be as direct as you'd like it to be in some ways and absurdly direct in others.

My suspicion has long been, for example, that paying quarterbacks a lot of money or having them chew up a lot of cap isn't a problem. What tends to hurt you is having a good quarterback. It's a correlation vs causation situation.

My premise presumes drafting is the most important way to build a team. This can be debated, of course.

When you find a great quarterback, you win more games. In the case of a rookie, he will tend to not win much in year 1 or 2 and start to win more in years 3 and 4. Once he demonstrates that greatness, say by winning a playoff game, you're suddenly drafting late. Right now, the Packers are drafting 25th. Had they lost in the wildcard, 19th. Had they missed the playoffs entirely with their same 9-8 record, as early as 14th. Had they lost the Lions in week 17, as early as 12th.

You're drafting later. You drafting success just got harder. A quick google say 1-10, you have a 55% chance of getting a Pro Bowler. 21-30 has only a 33% chance. The two Super Bowl teams have only a 25% chance.

This later drafting is what hurts teams and makes it harder to sustain success or get over the hump. It just tends to happen the same time that those quarterback start getting the big bucks. And the better they do, the better their teams tend to do. So they draft later AND reward the quarterback with more money.

I would agree with this to some extent, but paying a top QB the kind of money that they are getting now is both a blessing and a curse. Yes, you have one of the best players, at the most coveted position, but that is cap costly over the life of the contract.

While QB's historically have made more than their equals at all the other positions, the distance between the top salaries of each position seem to have grown quite a bit. So as you say, if you are team with a top 5 QB and you have a great season, you are going to pay for it in the way of the draft. However, in regards to his salary, whether you pay it as you go, pay it up front or push a lot out to be paid later, you are still paying that premium for a premium QB. A premium that can equal that of 2-5 decent players at other positions.

 

[tynimiller]

Years ago (like three) Capt made a claim Russ Ball is a lower than most guaranteed money guy and by Russ he meant GB.


he shared some figures and it seemed to be outside very special players we did operate in bottom twenty percentile if I remember in comparison to the league.

 

[Half Empty]

Right but I was referring to a historical breakdown for each year, as to how much each team has guaranteed in their contracts over the years. Also, to correlate that with the wins and losses would add some intrigue to it.

This page from Sportrac should get you started. Obviously just for this year on this page, but various sorting options for 1000 contracts.

 

[Poppa San]

Jordan Whitehead - Jets signed him to a 2 year $14.5M deal ($7.25M/Yr) type deal and has been very productive. I'd argue he is the tier Savage can be but isn't consistently.

MJ Stewart - Signed a two year deal for $6M ($3M/Yr) with the Texans this past offseason and he is not the tier player Savage is but is similar to the bad Savage times we have. He has only started 10 games over like six years.

I'm going to expect something in this range, especially since the DBs seem to play better when he is back there communicating the alignments and switches.

 

[mradtke66]

However, in regards to his salary, whether you pay it as you go, pay it up front or push a lot out to be paid later, you are still paying that premium for a premium QB. A premium that can equal that of 2-5 decent players at other positions.

Theoretically, maybe. In practice, I think not.

Again, draft is they in my premise. Tying up the money in the QB doesn't hurt you because, again, theoretically, you aren't signing many FAs and those you do aren't expensive--they're gap fillers.

You're unlikely to lose your own super starts because the QB isn't chewing up *that* much money. You can find ways to keep your elite players on your team, you just have to be willing to let the middling-to-good guys go when their rookie contracts expire. Somehow we had Rodgers, Bhak, Smith, and Smith on this same team.

 

[milani]

This page from Sportrac should get you started. Obviously just for this year on this page, but various sorting options for 1000 contracts.

If Captain were here I would assign him with the task. Seemed like he stayed up all night.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This page from Sportrac should get you started. Obviously just for this year on this page, but various sorting options for 1000 contracts.

Quite the project you gave me, thanks?

Interesting to note:

Bahk is the only Packer in the top 100 of guaranteed money.

Gary is the next guy and he is only 114th on the list. ($34,646,928)

Jordan Love is tied with a bunch of guys at 319th ($13M).

 

[tynimiller]

Quite the project you gave me, thanks?

Interesting to note:

Bahk is the only Packer in the top 100 of guaranteed money.

Gary is the next guy and he is only 114th on the list. ($34,646,928)

Jordan Love is tied with a bunch of guys at 319th ($13M).

By percentage of contract or just lump sum? I think you need to look at percent of contract personally.

 

[thequick12]

As I have previously mentioned, turn his base salary into per-game bonuses. If he's active, he gets paid. If he's inactive, he doesn't. There would be more details to sort out and it's more complicated than that, but it's doable.

And since he only played 1/17 games this year, even if he's healthy the entire year, that's a 2025 cap hit, not 2024.

I mean I dont know enough about the salary cap to know if that works but it seems reasonable to me...look what Bakh posted!

On another note my boss at work today brought up how Aaron Jones took a pay cut to stay with the Packers. He then said couldn't we have gotten him some endorsement deals so he could make up the money? My first thought was yeah, theres no rule against that. And that would be a good way to work around the salary cap.

 

[mradtke66]

I mean I dont know enough about the salary cap to know if that works but it seems reasonable to me...look what Bakh posted!

It depends if Bhak is willing. He doesn't have to accept such a contract change. He demand pay me or cut me. Maybe he'd be willing to tack on an extra, with a modest bonus in exchange for taking most of the money as per-game active bonuses. It all depends on many variables.

As far as how it works out...let's say he's amenable to per-game active bonuses of 1 million per game. As he missed 16 games this season and played in one, 1 game (1 million) would be be considered likely to be earned and count against the 2024 cap. The other 16 games/million are considered Unlikely to be Earned, because he didn't hit the metric the previous year (2023.) Those incentives don't count against 2024's cap. They will, however, count against 2025.

The catch, of course, is if he plays all 17, now all 17 of 2025 would also count in 2025. The 16 from 2024 and all 17 2025.

For this to work, you'd almost need to extend him 2-3 years past 2024 to give you room to play games. Again, if the previous happens, you could turn the 17 game-day active bonuses (now Likely to Be Earned) into a signing bonus and spread the 17 million over the next 3 years rather than 17 right now plus the extra 16 from 2024.

Nothing is free with the salary, but you can structure your contracts to pick and choose when the bill comes due.

On another note my boss at work today brought up how Aaron Jones took a pay cut to stay with the Packers. He then said couldn't we have gotten him some endorsement deals so he could make up the money? My first thought was yeah, theres no rule against that. And that would be a good way to work around the salary cap.

Generally, endorsements are the responsibility of the player's agent. They also are that lucrative unless things are just right. Right market, right position so they are marketable, etc. Quarterbacks are going to pull more money than offensive linemen.

 

[thequick12]

Generally, endorsements are the responsibility of the player's agent. They also are that lucrative unless things are just right. Right market, right position so they are marketable, etc. Quarterbacks are going to pull more money than offensive linemen.

I get all the stuff about likely to be earned and what not...I guess my question was more would the NFLPA be ok with such a contract. I can't think of an instance when a player had a contract like this? Roster bonuses yes, but not to that extent

Yeah, if I was paying an agent whatever percentage I would expect them to make me more $ than I could get by myself. Endorsements could obviously be a part of that.

I just think it was a neat idea for the fans to step up and get something done to keep a guy like Aaron Jones on the team next season. Im sure there's plenty of Packers fans that own buisness' etc. And it would be a way to get around the salary cap within the rules.

Actually looking at Jones' contract...he has a 2024 cap hit of 17.5 m and a deadcap number of about 12.5 m. With only 5 million to be saved against the cap. In my opinion it wouldn't be worth cutting him for the savings. In fact I would be in favor of extending him to lower that cap number and allow him to finish his career in GB with Love