According to Rand Gatlin of the NFL Network the salary cap is expected to raise to at least $155 million for the 2016 season. That would leave the Packers with close to $25 million in cap space (that number is without Guion's newly signed contract as no details are available yet).
Let's consider the other cap subtractions before any further free agent signings could be considered.
You have to subtract $2 mil from that $25 mil (assuming a $155 mil cap for 2016) for the top draft picks assuming they take the spots of guys at the bottom of the 51. That takes us down to $23 mil.
By the time the season starts it will be 53 + 10 on the practice squad going against the cap, not the offseason/preseason 51.
Let's call Guion #52. That 3 year / $11.25 mil deal is not the kind of contract where you typically see a substantial signing bonus laying off any meaningful cap hit to future years. For example, Neal's 2 year / $8 mil deal had a $2.5 mil signing bonus but the cap hit was spread fairly evenly: year 1 was $3.75 mil vs. $4.25 mil in year 2.
For Guion, I'd estimate the 2016 cap hit at $3 mil. That would take us down to $20 mil in cap space.
The #53 will cost a half mil assuming that spot is taken by a minimum salary rookie. The cap space tally is now $19.5 mil.
Now we have to add the 10 practice squad guys. That's about $1 mil. We're down $18.5 mil
The Top 51 number does not include the dead cap already on the books for 2016. That's $678,593 according to Over the Cap. Let's round it down to a half mil taking us down to $18 mil.
We can't forget about IR replacements. Guys on IR count against the cap as do their replacements. Let's say for sake of argument a somewhat average count of 7 IR players. If you replace them with minimum salary rookies at around a half mil each, that's $3.5 mil against the cap, taking us down to $14.5 mil cap space. $5 mil in reserve is probably a more prudent amount in the event of a season like 2010 where about dozen guys ended up on IR, but lets stick with the $3.5 mil in reserve. You'd not want to be in a position to have to release a guy you'd rather not in order to clear space in the middle of the season just to fill the roster and stay under the cap.
In the vein of cutting players to clear meaningful cap space, there aren't any candidates. Cutting Datone Jones would clear about $1.5 mil before replacing him. A minimum salary rookie in his stead takes the net down to $1 mil. That's not going to happen (even if it should) since he'll be given one more year to demonstrate if he can fill Peppers' shoes (which he won't come close to doing). Oh, heck, I shouldn't be so ******* Jones. He's worth a mil in cap space space. 2017 will be another matter. Cutting Masthay would clear $1.3 mil, but his replacement still has to be paid; a minimum salary rookie replacement doesn't quite net $1 mil in cap savings.
So, that's $14.5 mil to work with or maybe $15.5 mil after replacing Masthay with a cheap rookie. If anybody would like to see any of the Packer free agents in the following link resigned (except for Guion who's already on board), take whatever you think their cap hits would be less the half mil for the minimum salary rookies I've assumed in their stead above and subtract it from the $14.5 mil or $15.5 mil:
http://overthecap.com/free-agency/green-bay-packers
Some of those players will need to be resigned from a depth standpoint. They cannot all be replaced with rookies. Choose your poisons.
Now lets look at what Thompson may have in mind for conserving cap to carryover to 2017.
Current cap commitments for 2017 total $113 mil for only 25 players under contract, or perhaps more accurately $116 mil for 26 players when adding Guion. Guestimating $160 mil cap for 2017, that's about $44 mil in available space for 2017 plus whatever Thomson carries over. That sounds like a lot until you look at the free agents after 2016:
http://overthecap.com/free-agency/green-bay-packers
There really isn't much room for free agency spending this year when taking the 2 year perspective. I'll refrain from repeating my outlook from last year vis a vis the implications of these numbers come 2017 other that to say I don't see anything to change my mind.
)
