Packers Releasing Nick Perry

[sschind]

I did not read the link, but what your comments do not elucidate is the fact that if you cut him after June 1, then from a two year perspective the additional cap cost for the priviledge is $4.8 mil, the amount of the signing bonus. In other words, what that would amount to is dumping $4.8 mil in cap by paying that bonus for the priviledge of moving $7.4 mil in cap space from 2020 to 2019.

The Gutekunst blueprint in this free agency foray (guys in their mid-20's) is to build toward a multi-year window of opportunity. Dumping $4.8 mil in cap just to move cap space from 2020 to 2019 would be a "win now" move, and is antithetical to the multi-year blueprint.

I would be quite surprised if Gutekunst used the June 1 option.

If he is designated a post June first cut they will not owe him the roster bonus due on march 15th. If they actually wait until after June first then they will have to pay him his 4.8 million. On the other hand if they designate him a post June first cut none of the cap savings gained will be available until then so they couldn't use any of it to sign players now.

If they cut him with a post June first designation he immediately becomes a free agent and is free to sign with anyone and he is off the roster. Since he is not on the roster on march 15th he doesn't get the 4.8 million thus it will not count toward the cap. The difference is cutting him now and designating him a post June 1 cut (each team has 2 of those) or actually waiting until June first to cut him. Waiting will result in what you described designating will not add 4.8 million to our cap hit at any time.

This post is based of my understanding of the salary cap and the post June 1st designation. By no means should it be construed as gospel as I have been wrong before.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Every thing I read said that they had to cut him prior to the start of the new league year (3/15) or he gets paid the roster bonus. Maybe I am reading it wrong, but there are per game bonuses and being on the team at the start of the year bonuses and I think this was the second of the two.

That Post June 1st designation just lets the team spread out the dead cap over 2 seasons, instead of all counting now.

 

[sschind]

Nick Perry's release came without a post-June 1 designation, according to the NFL's official transactions. That means the Packers are taking the big dead money hit ($11.1 million) right away. They'll still save $3,337,500 in cap space this year but could have saved $10,737,500 (cap space) if they went the post-June 1 route.

However, cutting him before 3/15 saves the Packers $5.2M in roster and workout bonuses.

you could have told me that before. It would have saved us all a lot of time.

 

[sschind]

Every thing I read said that they had to cut him prior to the start of the new league year (3/15) or he gets paid the roster bonus. Maybe I am reading it wrong, but there are per game bonuses and being on the team at the start of the year bonuses and I think this was the second of the two.

That Post June 1st designation just lets the team spread out the dead cap over 2 seasons, instead of all counting now.

Depends on when the bonus is due. Some are on the first day of the new year some are on the third. It all depends on the contract. As long as he is cut before the due date he doesn't get the bonus so it doesn't count against the cap even if he is designated a post June 1st cut.

They still could have avoided the roster bonus by using the June 1st designation but it comes with its own drawbacks. Primarily tying up cap space until June 1st and keeping dead money on the books next season.

The post June 1st cut would also not give any cap relief UNTIL June first so any money saved in 2019 would not be available now. On June first they would gain 11.some million right now they gain 3.some. In addition to having to wait for the cap relief they would still have dead money next season to count. This way its all over this year and they are free and clear.

there were three options.

Cut him outright now before the bonus is due (which is apparently what they did) and take the full accelerated signing bonus hit of 11 this year with a cap relief of 3.whatever million available immediately.

Cut him with a post June 1 designation which means they still have to count the 11 million accelerated SB but only 1/3 of it in 2019. The downside is they still had to carry his 2019 salary (not the bonus) plus that 1/3 on the books until June first at which point his salary portion would drop off and only the 1/3 would count meaning they wouldn't gain any relief until June first. They would also have 2/3 of the signing bonus count as dead money in 2020.

Wait until after June first which would accomplish the same thing with regards to the signing bonus money but they would also have to count the 4.8 million dollar roaster bonus that would have been paid on March 15th (or whenever it was due)

 

[HardRightEdge]

Cut him with a post June 1 designation which means they still have to count the 11 million accelerated SB but only 1/3 of it in 2019. The downside is they still had to carry his 2019 salary (not the bonus) plus that 1/3 on the books until June first at which point his salary portion would drop off and only the 1/3 would count meaning they wouldn't gain any relief until June first. They would also have 2/3 of the signing bonus count as dead money in 2020.

The treatement of salary and signing bonus in that description makes sense which does ordinarily present options with trade-offs.

What I cannot find is a reference saying the roster bonus would not have been paid with a June 1 designation at this time. Got a link?

 

[sschind]

If that were the case then there would have been no advantage to doing anything with Perry other than a post-6/1 designation whether they intended to use the additional 2019 cap space or not. They didn't do that.

It is best to assume the CBA is tight as a drum because it is. Options always have tradeoffs.

The advantage is they have 3.3 million dollars to spend right now and no dead money next year.

You keep saying every penny they pay has to count and I agree with you. None of what I said in any way circumvents anything in the CBA. If they cut him now with a June first designation (which is different than cutting him on June 1st) it means just that, he is cut right now and is due no more bonus money as he is no longer on the roster.

IMO they chose the right option. It's one thing to have cap space taken up by a guy who is no longer on your team but I always hated the idea of having cap space taken up by someone who left two years ago.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

A conventional cut of Perry absolutely needed to take place by March 14th, 2019. This is because of one of the clauses in his contract, which pays him a $4.8 million roster bonus if he is on the roster on the third day of the NFL’s 2019 league year — which is March 15th. If the Packers had kept him around through that time they would have had to pay that out, it would have been added to any dead money that would go on the cap.

 

[sschind]

The treatement of salary and bonus in that description makes sense which does present options with trade-offs.

What I cannot find is a reference saying the signing bonus is not paid with that June 1 designation. Got a link?

I think we may be confused on a few of our terms or at least not on the same page.

You keep saying signing bonus I am talking about the roster bonus. The signing bonus has to count no matter what like you said. Cut now it all counts this season. Cut with a post June first designation with three years left 1/3 counts this year and 2/3 next year. There is no getting around that.

The roster bonus which is due on March 15th will not be paid since he is cut prior to that date even if he is designated a post June 1st and thus it will not be counted.

I'd normally defer to your knowledge on the cap issues and the like but I am fairly confident I have represented this correctly. Like I said though I think its just a miscommunication.

Each option has its advantages and disadvantages and I think they chose the right one.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I understand now what you are saying Sschind: I thought you were saying to wait and cut him prior to June1. Cutting him now and declaring him a Post June1 cut is all you were referring to. My bad.

 

[sschind]

A conventional cut of Perry absolutely needed to take place by March 14th, 2019. This is because of one of the clauses in his contract, which pays him a $4.8 million roster bonus if he is on the roster on the third day of the NFL’s 2019 league year — which is March 15th. If the Packers had kept him around through that time they would have had to pay that out, it would have been added to any dead money that would go on the cap.

Yes, but they could have cut him now and designated him a post June 1st cut to avoid paying that bonus. Designating as a post June 1st cut is not the same as cutting post June 1st. With the former he is off your roster immediately and no further bonuses are due. With the latter he is still on your roster so he would be paid that money and it would have to be counted.

Its possible I misread HREs post that stated all and it was all due to a misunderstanding.

An interesting side note the Steelers could have insisted on designating the AB trade as post June first and they could have gained similar relief with the cap but they would have needed to count some dead money next year so they decided to take it all at once.

 

[sschind]

I understand now what you are saying Sschind: I thought you were saying to wait and cut him prior to June1. Cutting him now and declaring him a Post June1 cut is all you were referring to. My bad.

No problem. Misunderstandings and miscommunications have caused more problems that this.

Now we can get on to more important things. Like how long will it take Brandon to explode when we draft Hockenson at #12.

I'm guessing he has his rant all typed out and is just waiting to hit the reply button the second it is announced.

 

[Mondio]

He could just copy and paste previous tirades

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think we may be confused on a few of our terms or at least not on the same page.

You keep saying signing bonus I am talking about the roster bonus. The signing bonus has to count no matter what like you said. Cut now it all counts this season. Cut with a post June first designation with three years left 1/3 counts this year and 2/3 next year. There is no getting around that.

The roster bonus which is due on March 15th will not be paid since he is cut prior to that date even if he is designated a post June 1st and thus it will not be counted.

I'd normally defer to your knowledge on the cap issues and the like but I am fairly confident I have represented this correctly. Like I said though I think its just a miscommunication.

Each option has its advantages and disadvantages and I think they chose the right one.

I mistyped "signing" instead of "roster" confusing the issue. My appologies.

What I'm looking for is a link that says the the Packers would have been exempt from paying the roster bonus had they designated his cut as being post-June 1. I'm finding nothing to that affect in the various references I've looked at.

If your proposition is incorrect, then the reason for not using that designation is clear: dumping $4.8 million in roster bonus/cap for the priviledge of moving cap space around from year to year would be pretty dumb.

If you are correct, which remains in question, the reason to choose one option or the other has nothing to do with not wanting to see Perry's dead cap number in the dead cap list through next year. That's just an unfortuante reminder without financial implications. The cost is sunk no matter what year you put it in. The option under this scenario is either taking the $3.7 million in savings now vs. carrying a large amount of cap in Perry's name until June 1. Taking the cap savings now may be needed to stay under the Top 51 cap, either now or with anticipated draft costs. But that's just a conjecture pending some evidence the roster bonus would not have been paid under this scenario.

 

[lambeaulambo]

good riddance imo....nick perry had one good year...one

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

This move was questionable.... To drop 10 mil in dead cap space is losing 6 or 7% of the years cap. Thompson had very very little dead cap. This one move is like two full years of thompsins dead cap allowance....

Then we sign 3 big dollar, 2nd contracts on quality players who havnt broke out yet..... To commit to 4 years so 10 mil or 4 years at 16.5 mil a year like we did... Its risky. You can't just drop them a year in if they don't work out....

Hopefully the moves work.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The only way this move ends up looking bad is if Nick Perry goes out and plays like he did in 2016, maybe 2015. Pretty obvious that the Packers thought that the likelihood of that happening was slim.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

With the release of Perry, the Packers currently have 7 players that were taken in TT's 11 drafts prior to 2016. Not sure how that compares to other teams, but seems pretty low?

• Rodgers (2005)
• Crosby (2007)
• Bulaga (2010)
• Mike Daniels (2012)
• Bahk: (2013)
• Linsley (2014)
• D. Adams (2014)

 

[hallzi43]

This move was questionable.... To drop 10 mil in dead cap space is losing 6 or 7% of the years cap. Thompson had very very little dead cap. This one move is like two full years of thompsins dead cap allowance....

Then we sign 3 big dollar, 2nd contracts on quality players who havnt broke out yet..... To commit to 4 years so 10 mil or 4 years at 16.5 mil a year like we did... Its risky. You can't just drop them a year in if they don't work out....

Hopefully the moves work.

He would have accounted for 14.4M without a release. So we save about 3.3M by doing so and both sides can just move on. Thompson had very little dead cap sure, but he also backloaded a few contracts at a high premium and they ended up getting held on for too long.

 

[sschind]

I mistyped "signing" instead of "roster" confusing the issue. My appologies.

What I'm looking for is a link that says the the Packers would have been exempt from paying the roster bonus had they designated his cut as being post-June 1. I'm finding nothing to that affect in the various references I've looked at.

If your proposition is incorrect, then the reason for not using that designation is clear: dumping $4.8 million in roster bonus/cap for the priviledge of moving cap space around from year to year would be pretty dumb.

If you are correct, which remains in question, the reason to choose one option or the other has nothing to do with not wanting to see Perry's dead cap number in the dead cap list through next year. That's just an unfortuante reminder without financial implications. The cost is sunk no matter what year you put it in. The option under this scenario is either taking the $3.7 million in savings now vs. carrying a large amount of cap in Perry's name until June 1. Taking the cap savings now may be needed to stay under the Top 51 cap, either now or with anticipated draft costs. But that's just a conjecture pending some evidence the roster bonus would not have been paid under this scenario.

Try this link.

https://247sports.com/nfl/denver-br...enver-Broncos-3-Primary-Candidates-113418063/

or this one

https://www.profootballrumors.com/2018/05/explaining-post-june-1-cuts

I also found it somewhere else the other day but can't find it now.

There are advantages and disadvantages to all three options (Cut outright now, cut with June 1st designation, Cut after June 1st) and they change with each contract and the amount of cap space a team has. You don't see many post 6/1 cuts but its an option that obviously works in some instances or you would never see it. I didn't study the numbers enough to know what the difference would have been for the Packers but I'm sure the Packers did and chose the option that was best for them at this time. The bottom line is by cutting him outright now they take a large hit this year but gain relief immediately. They also avoid paying a roster bonus and having it count against the cap but they could have avoided that with a post 6/1 designation as well.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Try this link.

https://247sports.com/nfl/denver-br...enver-Broncos-3-Primary-Candidates-113418063/

I stand corrected.

Then the reason for not exercising that option on Perry is to captures the $3.7 mil in cap savings now rather than carrying a semi-large Perry cap number up to 6/1. This suggests Gutekunst is still on the hunt with about $16.5 mil cap space as a result.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I have learned something new this offseason, the Post-June 1 Designation. While I was aware of it, I did not fully understand how it effected roster bonuses and the cap numbers.

Thank you Mr. Scchind!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[hallzi43]

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/20...e-nick-perry-without-post-june-1-designation/

"Here were the two options:

– Without the post-June 1 designation: $11.1 million dead money in 2019, $3,337,500 in savings in 2019, $0 dead money in 2020

– With the post-June 1 designation: $3.7 million dead money in 2019, $10,737,500 in savings in 2019 (after June 1), $7.4 million dead money in 2020

The Packers picked the first option, choosing to realize the small bit of savings now and not kick the can down the road on the dead money hit. Perry’s contract will now have no effect on the cap in 2020."

 

[HardRightEdge]

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/20...e-nick-perry-without-post-june-1-designation/

"Here were the two options:

– Without the post-June 1 designation: $11.1 million dead money in 2019, $3,337,500 in savings in 2019, $0 dead money in 2020

– With the post-June 1 designation: $3.7 million dead money in 2019, $10,737,500 in savings in 2019 (after June 1), $7.4 million dead money in 2020

The Packers picked the first option, choosing to realize the small bit of savings now and not kick the can down the road on the dead money hit. Perry’s contract will now have no effect on the cap in 2020."

It should be noted that over a 2 period there is no advantage one way or the other. So, why choose the first option and not the second?

By foregoing the June 1 designation, the Packers get the $3.3 mil in savings now.

Had they taken the post-June 1 option they would have had to instead carry a chunk of Perry cap on the books until June 1. His contract data is now gone from the usual sites so I'm working from memory. His base salary for 2019 was I believe $5.4 mil and the Packers would also have to carry 1/3 of his 3 year singing bonus hangover which is $3.7 million. That's $9.1 mil in Perry cap the Packers would have to carry until June 1 while foregong the $3.3 mil in savings.

The result is that the first option is a net $12.4 mil add to cap now relative to the other option.

Had the Packers chosen the second option, the current cap space would be about $4.6 mil instead of about $17 mil.

The draft is on 4/25 - 4/27. If the Packers make no additional moves and had they taken the June 1 option there might not be enough cap to even sign the draft class which will have a Top 51 net cost around that number. It also provides additional cap to sign Wilkerson or some other lower priced player(s).

 

[hallzi43]

It should be noted that over a 2 period there is no advantage one way or the other. So, why choose the first option and not the second?

By foregoing the June 1 designation, the Packers get the $3.3 mil in savings now.

Had they taken the post-June 1 option they would have had to instead carry a chunk of Perry cap on the books until June 1. His contract data is now gone from the usual sites so I'm working from memory. His base salary for 2019 was I believe $5.4 mil and the Packers would also have to carry 1/3 of his 3 year singing bonus hangover which is $3.7 million. That's $9.1 mil in Perry cap the Packers would have to carry until June 1 while foregong the $3.3 mil in savings.

The result is that the first option is a net $12.4 mil add to cap now relative to the other option.

Had the Packers chosen the second option, the current cap space would be about $4.6 mil instead of about $17 mil.

The draft is on 4/25 - 4/27. If the Packers make no additional moves and had they taken the June 1 option there might not be enough cap to even sign the draft class which will have a Top 51 net cost around that number. It also provides additional cap to sign Wilkerson or some other lower priced player(s).

Saves us 7.4M in dead money for 2020.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Saves us 7.4M in dead money for 2020.

No. All that happens is moving the cap saving and dead money around from one time or year to the other.

Neither dead money nor cap is created or destroyed in one option vs. the other, cut now vs. post 6/1 designation. From a 2 year perspective there is no advantage to one or the other.