David Bakhtiari

[SudsMcBucky]

My understand is they would have to extend him in order to spread out his cap hit. The Packers could spread it out themselves if they release him after June 1?

That's correct. They'd actually have to extend him. A release post June 1, however, does NOT spread out the cap in this case, as it's the last year of his contract. All $19MM would hit regardless if he's cut pre or post June 1.

 

[mradtke66]

Doesn't Bak get the dead cap money after March 1.?

No. Dead cap is the salary cap allocation of previously paid money. The money is gone, we just have to count it against the cap in 2024 based on the structure. Typically, these are signing bonuses.

The savings money is choosing to cut or trade him before his 2024 is in effect. That additional money is his base salary + a 2024 roster bonus. The roster bonus is just that. They are often structured like this to force the team to cut or extend. Yes, they can just pay it, but there is a hard line in sand. Deadlines get work done, etc etc.

The salary requires him to be on the roster for game 1 of the season. As Bhak is a vested vet, his base salary is guaranteed if he is on a roster week 1.

 

[jetfixer]

Whatever happens, I hope he understands that this young team nearly went to the NFC championship in a "rebuilding" year without him and his buddy.

 

[tynimiller]

The DB situation isn't as clean cut as it normally is for a person in his position and the team...his injury is a MASSIVE piece to it....cutting may get VERY messy due to injury settlement and such....trading him is massively messy too as a team no doubt would have to waive any risk of not passing a physical.....

Truthfully the injury issue is why I honestly think a reworked deal happens, he showcases whether he is healthy or not and then the team cuts or trades him.

 

[AKCheese]

So the real question is do we want to pay $10M (roster bonus) to take a look at him in OTAs and/or camp - and then $10M more to have him play (if it turns out he can). So the real question is that $20M - the first $20M is already gone. What percentagr of their projected bonuses and salary (in this case $20M) do players typically get in an injury settlement? I believe that money also counts against the cap.

 

[tynimiller]

So the real question is do we want to pay $10M (roster bonus) to take a look at him in OTAs and/or camp - and then $10M more to have him play (if it turns out he can). So the real question is that $20M - the first $20M is already gone. What percentagr of their projected bonuses and salary (in this case $20M) do players typically get in an injury settlement? I believe that money also counts against the cap.

No way of knowing what the settlement issue would render sadly.

 

[mradtke66]

So the real question is do we want to pay $10M (roster bonus) to take a look at him in OTAs and/or camp - and then $10M more to have him play (if it turns out he can).

I would presume whatever the extension/adjustment/whatever you want to call it, deals with the roster bonus.

It could be pushed until after he is able to pass a physical, assuming he could do so by training camp. It could additionally be converted to signing bonus, so that he get's that 10M, but we are more-able to pick when it hits the cap. There are options to give him the chance to earn that 20M back and do so in a way that doesn't hamper us.

The ability is still there. The Lions game where he was reactivated for week 17, he was still great. Week 1 this year against the Bears, he was still great.

 

[Ebonypete]

Even if he passes the physical - the recent history is he won’t last. Sad, as he is a good guy but it’s more disruptive to plan on him and later learn he can’t play. I attribute the slow early season this past year to finding the right offensive line combo in short order. We have the line without him. Work with him to find the best exit ramp and use the first round pick on the O line.

 

[Pkrjones]

The ability is still there. The Lions game where he was reactivated for week 17, he was still great. Week 1 this year against the Bears, he was still great.

I think Gute needs to weigh the 48 games that Bahktiari has NOT BEEN AVAILABLE much more heavily than the 2+ games he did play since his catastrophic knee injury. IMHO it's not worth an additional $20mil to find out if he'll be able to play 20 games or 2 snaps in '24.

Availability is as crucial as ability & $20mil spent on Bahktiari is $20mil NOT spent on bostering: S, CB, OG, OC, OLB, RB, ILB and/or DL.

 

[mradtke66]

I think Gute needs to weigh the 48 games that Bahktiari has NOT BEEN AVAILABLE much more heavily than the 2+ games he did play since his catastrophic knee injury.

Both can be done.

I don't want to pay his roster bonus. I don't think any team would. I presume keeping him involves a different contract. I have proposed this multiple times, but if we could have him for ~1.17M in 2024 + per-game bonuses of ~1.17M per game, I'd take that.

That 1.17M is 1/17th of 20M for those playing at home.

 

[mradtke66]

$20mil spent on Bahktiari is $20mil NOT spent on bostering: S, CB, OG, OC, OLB, RB, ILB and/or DL.

Whoops, missed my response to this one....

$20M doesn't buy much in terms of quality starters, assuming any are even available, but again, I don't expect to chew up 20M on Bhak in 2024, regardless if he stays or not.

At RG, the top 7 players have a yearly average of 10M or more. Players in the 2-6M range, the next 7 or so, are either old will be FAs in 2025. I expect these plays to either age out/retire or if these players are good, they'll probably demand 10M per year.

I mention RG as it tends to be one of the most under-valued positions, though Center has a similar curve. As does safety.

Realistically, if you take your 20M to FA looking to solve more than 2 positions, you're going to be disappointed. Or you're going to fill in gaps, your 3rd guard or your backup nickel corner.

 

[Firethorn1001]

The DB situation isn't as clean cut as it normally is for a person in his position and the team...his injury is a MASSIVE piece to it....cutting may get VERY messy due to injury settlement and such....trading him is massively messy too as a team no doubt would have to waive any risk of not passing a physical.....

Truthfully the injury issue is why I honestly think a reworked deal happens, he showcases whether he is healthy or not and then the team cuts or trades him.

I wasn't thinking of the injury piece to this and if he clears a physical or not. Definitely going to play into this and make a potential mess of it. Possible they could be on the hook for that roster bonus regardless.

 

[Schultz]

Whoops, missed my response to this one....

$20M doesn't buy much in terms of quality starters, assuming any are even available, but again, I don't expect to chew up 20M on Bhak in 2024, regardless if he stays or not.

At RG, the top 7 players have a yearly average of 10M or more. Players in the 2-6M range, the next 7 or so, are either old will be FAs in 2025. I expect these plays to either age out/retire or if these players are good, they'll probably demand 10M per year.

I mention RG as it tends to be one of the most under-valued positions, though Center has a similar curve. As does safety.

Realistically, if you take your 20M to FA looking to solve more than 2 positions, you're going to be disappointed. Or you're going to fill in gaps, your 3rd guard or your backup nickel corner.

IMO. I would be happy with $20 million getting a starter and a back-up. Say a $14 mil a year starter (S) and a $6 mil back-up depth guy (RB). Sure would make the draft a little less draft for need IMO.

 

[Sanguine camper]

Even if he passes the physical - the recent history is he won’t last. Sad, as he is a good guy but it’s more disruptive to plan on him and later learn he can’t play. I attribute the slow early season this past year to finding the right offensive line combo in short order. We have the line without him. Work with him to find the best exit ramp and use the first round pick on the O line.

Agree that bringing back Bak is disruptive. He'll play a few games and then sit. Time to move on. Since the draft is deep with O line talent, spending a first or second round pick on the O line for depth is a better option than wondering how long Bak can play before he goes to IR.

 

[mradtke66]

IMO. I would be happy with $20 million getting a starter and a back-up. Say a $14 mil a year starter (S) and a $6 mil back-up depth guy (RB). Sure would make the draft a little less draft for need IMO.

It all comes down to structure. It's possible to have one's cake and eat it too.

16/17 of those game day bonus checks wouldn't count against the 2024 cap. "Unlikely to be earned" and all that jazz.

Regarding that hypothetical, will a starting safety worth 14M even make it to FA? I'd guess not, because such a safety is a pretty darn good player and the team that currently holds his rights will extend or franchise him.

 

[Pugger]

Agree that bringing back Bak is disruptive. He'll play a few games and then sit. Time to move on. Since the draft is deep with O line talent, spending a first or second round pick on the O line for depth is a better option than wondering how long Bak can play before he goes to IR.

But do we want to just let him walk? IF he can play hopefully someone will take a flier on him. If we don't get any takers we might as well keep him around seeing we'll be paying him anyway?

 

[gopkrs]

I say lets move on unless he makes it totally untenable to pay him.

 

[Firethorn1001]

If we don't get any takers we might as well keep him around seeing we'll be paying him anyway?

Keeping him around will cost up to another $19-20M with the base and roster bonus add on to the $20M cap hit that will occur regardless. So, it is beyond 'already paying him'. Extra $5-7M? Eh... ok. $20M is like a safety and a veteran backup or 2.

 

[AKCheese]

What I’m reading now
$20 Mil bonus is flat out gone - period
His salary - if we cut him while injured we have to pay an injury settlement which is structured around how many games his injury will force him to sit out. If we/he agree at 5 games, he gets 5/17 of his salary and then week 6 he can go elsewhere to play. The roster bonus? Thats a 1 March decision to **** or get off the pot. So - to maximize savings we would have release him before his bonus is due (1 March??) Then he could say - hey I’m injured. Then the negotiation begins as to how injured he is as far as the upcoming 17 game season. He could say - hey I’m fine thanks for the memories - I’ll sign elsewhere. Or he could say - I don’t think I can play at all this year pay me my $10Mil Not really any great choices

 

[mradtke66]

What I’m reading now
$20 Mil bonus is flat out gone - period
His salary - if we cut him while injured we have to pay an injury settlement which is structured around how many games his injury will force him to sit out. If we/he agree at 5 games, he gets 5/17 of his salary and then week 6 he can go elsewhere to play. The roster bonus? Thats a 1 March decision to **** or get off the pot. So - to maximize savings we would have release him before his bonus is due (1 March??) Then he could say - hey I’m injured. Then the negotiation begins as to how injured he is as far as the upcoming 17 game season. He could say - hey I’m fine thanks for the memories - I’ll sign elsewhere. Or he could say - I don’t think I can play at all this year pay me my $10Mil Not really any great choices

I think you have it generally correct, though refusing to pay the roster bonus might just void his contract vs. a straight up cut. This is a detail I'm not entirely sure about.

Assuming we're stuck potentially paying him something due to an injury settlement is part of why I'd talk to him about coming up with a new deal. If the two sides a far apart, then sure, cut bait however we have to.

It's also possible the two sides agree to push back the roster bonus date if negotiations are happening.

 

[Sanguine camper]

Let's put Bak's salary for 2024 in perspective. He's already been paid 20 million which goes against the 2024 cap. If he comes back he'll get another 19 million making him the highest paid non qb in football. Not likely for somebody who you can't count on. If the Packers cut him, they could "potentially" resign him to a veteran minimum plus incentives. That could be in the range of 5-8 million per year. Is a gimpy LT worth 25-28 million per year? Doubtful. That's why I think Gute let's him go, the Packers take their 20 million cap hit and say goodbye. Gute praised LT Rasheed Walker in his press conference today. I think that tells you where he's leaning.

 

[AKCheese]

Looks to me like they’re on the hook for his 2024 salary unless and until he can pass a physical. They’ll have to fish or cut bait on the roster bonus before that’s likely to occur

 

[mradtke66]

Let's put Bak's salary for 2024 in perspective. He's already been paid 20 million which goes against the 2024 cap. If he comes back he'll get another 19 million making him the highest paid non qb in football. Not likely for somebody who you can't count on. If the Packers cut him, they could "potentially" resign him to a veteran minimum plus incentives. That could be in the range of 5-8 million per year. Is a gimpy LT worth 25-28 million per year? Doubtful. That's why I think Gute let's him go, the Packers take their 20 million cap hit and say goodbye. Gute praised LT Rasheed Walker in his press conference today. I think that tells you where he's leaning.

The problem with your math is you're looking at cash outlay vs. cap accounting.

You cannot look at the 20M (well, 19m and change) as being part of his salary for this year. You end up spiraling and making a poor argument. You can debate if the contract was good or not at the time it was signed, but the 20M isn't for this year. It was the money he got on day 1, year 1 before the ink was even dry PLUS a restructure. (I can't find his original contract, only the one in its current state with the current cap).

You could argue that letting him leave while taking the 20M dead cap is wasteful, but we're getting close to sunk cost fallacy territory now.

His actual salary, the money he is entitled to this year and what we stand to save if he's gone is a 9.5M roster bonus (March 1st), 10.7M salary, and a 700k workout bonus. That's roughly 20M of new cash.

We'll know the decision by the 1st. If they plan to move on from him, they won't pay it. That's the whole point of a big roster bonus like this. Either he's worth it and they extend him to avoid paying it or you have your drop-dead date. Maybe they (both sides) agree to push back the date to facilitate a trade.

 

[AKCheese]

I’ll repeat myself but - if he’s injured and not able to play/pass a physcal they may be liable for his entire salary - but maybe not the roster bonus(?). Lets say they decide prior to March first they’re going to move on. Fine they save $20 Mil. But if he says whoa whoa whoa I’m injured - he has to pass a physical before he can be released or more accurately the Packers are released from owing him his 2024 salary. If he’s out the whole year they owe him his entire salary. Lets say he’s ready to go week 3. Green Bay then can release him and he can sign elsewhere. I think that can be negotiated. So when you hear a guys been released with an injury settlement it means the team paid his salary through when he’s expected to be recovered. Now - if Bakh just says “I retire” (hard to imagine him waving goodbye without collecting the bonus(es) and at least part of his salary.

 

[PackerDNA]

Gute commented on Bakh yesterday, saying that they're monitoring his situation closely, and that they know he's working very very hard. All possibilities are open guys.