Packers Huddle

paco wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 11:32

Well that was good timing.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 10:57

Ingalls was trying to tout some absurd $9.2 million number that really didn't make sense.

It wasn't absurd. Most of these guys get their info from a NFLPA site (I saw this mentioned by several cap guys and Packers media people). This is what was reported there so its what they used. It probably includes things that didn't have to be taken into account for today's number. But people are already confused by it, there is no use in confusing your average fan even more.

I mean if anyone doesn't think the Packers have a 2 year window you're fooling yourselves.

So for Aaron Jones perspective, after two years he gets $20 million. I guess he looks at it that it's better to do this than be tagged.

This was a really good deal for the Green Bay Packers. And Aaron Jones is likely not a Packers after the 2022 season.

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 11:46

So for Aaron Jones perspective, after two years he gets $20 million. I guess he looks at it that it's better to do this than be tagged.

This was a really good deal for the Green Bay Packers. And Aaron Jones is likely not a Packers after the 2022 season.

Yeah, it's decision time before the roster bonus hits in 2023. There needs to be an extension or a restructure at that point, or Jones gets cut.

Jones would've earned $8.7M guaranteed with the tag. Now he gets 13M guaranteed and will earn 20M over the first two years. If he gets cut and re-enters the FA pool in 2023, he'd be 28 years old.

We actually could convert his 2022 roster bonus into signing bonus, putting his year 2 cap hit at just 6.75M. Or could restructure year 3, and bring that cap number down to manageable 12M.

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 10:34

I think to try to reach an extension now gave Z too much leverage. Get this done first and now we have the basis to talk extension during the season or next offseason. Same thing, really, with Davante. Too much leverage to use their extension as part of the deal to get under the initial cap today.

Looks like we are guaranteeing ourselves dead cap for Billy Turner with void years. Boy this team really is going for it.

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 15:53

Looks like we are going to be paying for Billy Turner a long time down the road. Boy this team really is going for it.

image.png

Wow, don't love the tactics but I do feel like this year is a special circumstance. Also, 0.89M times 3 is still only $2.6M accelerated in dead money when the years void.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 15:57

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 15:53

Looks like we are going to be paying for Billy Turner a long time down the road. Boy this team really is going for it.

image.png

Wow, don't love the tactics but I do feel like this year is a special circumstance. Also, 0.89M times 3 is still only $2.6M accelerated in dead money when the years void.

I have resigned to the fact that their tactic is all in for '21 and '22. And if they win a ring it will all be worth it.

But it looks like they also did Turner just to get "by" and they can then work with Tae, Z or Rodgers as needed moving forward.

Like you stated. It's only $2.7 million of dead cap in '23 so they probably thought better to do that than make a move with our bigger contract guys.

Also, this certainly makes it appear that Billy Turner is going to be a Packer in 21 and 22 which likely puts less stress on NEEDING a high end RT in this year's draft. It costs the same to keep or cut Billy in 2022.

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 16:12

Also, this certainly makes it appear that Billy Turner is going to be a Packer in 21 and 22 which likely puts less stress on NEEDING a high end RT in this year's draft. It costs the same to keep or cut Billy in 2022.

I mean, yeah; despite the baseless reservations a few board members have, he surprised us all and had a very good year at RT; I don't know how he's better at RT than he is at OG, but he is, so that's nice for us. It's still a very good year to draft the eventual replacement because the OT class is so deep, especially if you're not looking for a LT (even though the differentiation has mitigated over the years, it's still notable).

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 16:17

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2021 16:12

Also, this certainly makes it appear that Billy Turner is going to be a Packer in 21 and 22 which likely puts less stress on NEEDING a high end RT in this year's draft. It costs the same to keep or cut Billy in 2022.

I mean, yeah; despite the baseless reservations a few board members have, he surprised us all and had a very good year at RT; I don't know how he's better at RT than he is at OG, but he is, so that's nice for us. It's still a very good year to draft the eventual replacement because the OT class is so deep, especially if you're not looking for a LT (even though the differentiation has mitigated over the years, it's still notable).

Yeah. I'm just pointing it out because RT is not the desperate need that many are calling it is.

We definitely do need a 3rd Tackle though. Whether that is Runyan, Nijman or a rookie/UFA. I would be shocked if we got the UFA route.

I don't really want him to make more money than the last two years.

Agree. Thanks but time to move on.

Marcedes was a dependable and VERY effective blocker last season, but at 37 years old, I'd imagine the Packers will look for a young & cheap blocking TE before dishing money his way.

pay him the vet minimum as a player and the highest paid assistant TE coach in the league

(yes I know that's not how the salary cap works)

We are a better offense with him, he's still effective. Depends what kind of number, but I'd be excited to add him back.

Between Tonyan, Sternberger, and Degura, I think we should be JUST fine. Were any of our lineman former TEs?

Backthepack4ever wrote: ↑

18 Mar 2021 14:03

Agree. Thanks but time to move on.

to who though, he's still faster then most tackles and blocks just as well, I'd say let him go if we new more about Dequara, but he's a ? mark, and if Sternberger doesn't do better then last year in TC I"D send him packing.

salmar80 wrote: ↑

18 Mar 2021 14:11

Marcedes was a dependable and VERY effective blocker last season, but at 37 years old, I'd imagine the Packers will look for a young & cheap blocking TE before dishing money his way.

Marcedes just wants a little more cash..nothing wrong with asking. Gute was glowing in his post-season review and Rodgers needs a peer on the age front. As far as young and cheeep - the Packers are attempting to convert former DL Bronson Kaufusi into a TE. He dropped 15 lbs and has been working in the offseason to remake his body into a TE. Marcedes would be the perfect tutor for the guy.

Here's his stats when he was a 285 lb DE, he's already down to 270 now. That 3 cone is damn good for that weight

https://www.mockdraftable.com/player/bronson-kaufusi