Barfarn
  • Barfarn
  • Senior Member Topic Starter
8 years ago
As we think about wants/not wants in 2016 draft and free agency, one should at least take a peek at 2017. In the draft we must be thinking DL, OLB, OL and RB later, but not too much later. In general I like the idea of signing one stud FA as opposed to 2-3 mediocre guys; but given all the holes in the 2017 roster, the only position that this makes sense is for a stud DLman that replaces Guion’s salary; we may need to sign 2-3 guys for modest 2-3 yr deals to fill the holes in the 2017 roster like the 2 year deals for James Jones, Starks and Neal of years past. And I think this shows there are far more important positions to fill rather than TE and ILB.

Currently, for 2017, we have 28 players under contract for about 123M here they are [Kinda scary]:

Daniels, Guion [3M savings if cut]
Mathews [11M cap savings if cut], Ryan
Shields, Dix, Burnett, Randell, Rollins, Gunter, Goodson

Linsley, Bulaga, Taylor [2.4m savings if cut]
R.Rodgers, Backman
Nelson. Cobb, Adams, Monty, Abby, Janis, Johnson
Ripkowski
Rodgers, Hundley, Williams

Available to be added to this will be:

9 2016 draft picks: $7.5M

3 RFA: Pennell, Elliot, Banjo: $5.5M w/ lowest tender

13 ERFA: about $6.2M
Ringo 450
Thomas 480
Lavato 442.5
Walker 480
Henry 525
Vujonovich 450
Crockett 480
Rotherram 450
R. Daniel 442.5
Williams 450
Bradford 525
McByde 450
Campbell 525

Total 53 guys $142.2M

If cap is 160M; Ted Thompson will have 6M roll over giving us about 166M to spend. We need 2M to sign 2017 draft class [drafting #32, of course]; $7M rollover into 2017 and R.Rodgers, Adams and Linsley will get a playing time raise costing about $2.5M. We’ll have about $12.3M to spend on FAs and extensions.
Zero2Cool
8 years ago
Wait, the 1st day of the 2016 season is when we start looking at 2017?? You're really Ted Thompson, aren't ya??? lol


It is worth peeking into when considering how much money to spend on this offseason.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
8 years ago
2017 Unrestricted Free Agents
[list=1]
  • Josh Sitton - will sign
  • Micah Hyde - will sign, has no value elsewhere
  • David Bakhtiari
  • T.J. Lang
  • Jared Cook
  • J.C. Tretter

  • Datone Jones
  • Eddie Lacy
  • Sam Barrington

  • Josh Boyd
  • Nate Palmer
  • Tim Masthay
  • Nick Perry
  • Julius Peppers[/list]


  • Sitton will be extended during the season and probably Hyde as well. If Bakhtiari improves, he'll be extended. Lang it really depends on how well he heals from shoulder surgery.

    The salary cap is projected to increase by $10 million so really extending or re-signing the necessary guys will not be too horrific. Spotrac shows the Packers will have over $28 million in salary cap to spend.
    UserPostedImage
    PackFanWithTwins
    8 years ago
    this is a big reason why I wanted Ted to go for it this year.

    You did forget about Lacy Barfarn.

    We can't pay starters salary to all of the Oline. I expect only one of the guards to be signed, probably Sitton. Taylor will take over for lang. I would let Bahktiari go, I just don't think he is worth the salary he is going to get paid.

    I would expect by the start of the 2017 season both Rodgers and Matthews will have renegotiated contracts which will give is considerable more space to play with.

    Lacy is going to be interesting depending on his performance this year. If he has a big year, can we afford to keep him and also do we trust him enough that he won't go Oprah and load back on the pounds. I think that is a big reason for the two year deal with Starks, is for insurance incase Lacy gets offered a first day FA deal, and we haven't drafted a replacement.
    The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
    Wade
    • Wade
    • Veteran Member
    8 years ago

    2017 Unrestricted Free Agents
    [list=1]

  • Josh Sitton - will sign
  • Micah Hyde - will sign, has no value elsewhere
  • David Bakhtiari
  • T.J. Lang
  • Jared Cook
  • J.C. Tretter

  • Datone Jones
  • Eddie Lacy
  • Sam Barrington

  • Josh Boyd
  • Nate Palmer
  • Tim Masthay
  • Nick Perry
  • Julius Peppers[/list]


  • Sitton will be extended during the season and probably Hyde as well. If Bakhtiari improves, he'll be extended. Lang it really depends on how well he heals from shoulder surgery.

    The salary cap is projected to increase by $10 million so really extending or re-signing the necessary guys will not be too horrific. Spotrac shows the Packers will have over $28 million in salary cap to spend.

    Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



    Anyone else underwhelmed by most of the players on this list?

    Major value players: Sitton and Lang. Probably Lacy (assuming he rebounds this year) and Cook (if he pans out)
    Retiring guy: Peppers.

    Everyone else = backup quality guys.


    And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
    Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
    TheKanataThrilla
    8 years ago

    Anyone else underwhelmed by most of the players on this list?

    Major value players: Sitton and Lang. Probably Lacy (assuming he rebounds this year) and Cook (if he pans out)
    Retiring guy: Peppers.

    Everyone else = backup quality guys.

    Originally Posted by: Wade 



    They will be guys that need to be replaced though. I think it means we draft an OG and an OT this year. Those 2 comp picks in the 4th are quite handy.
    Wade
    • Wade
    • Veteran Member
    8 years ago

    They will be guys that need to be replaced though. I think it means we draft an OG and an OT this year. Those 2 comp picks in the 4th are quite handy.

    Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 



    Any thoughts on who the OG/OT might be? OG is a possibility -- there are going to be a fair number on the board between picks 50 and 150. But unless someone falls unexpectedly, they're going to have to reach a fair amount to get a potential future starter at tackle. More average backup guys.


    And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
    Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
    DakotaT
    8 years ago
    We have a major problem on the offensive line/future salary. And that problem is that the best players are guards and they do not command a higher salary. We can't lose either one, but can't afford to pay both either. The other problem is that or tackles aren't tackle starter money. Rodger is still getting a lot of pressure from the pash rush, when he should be pretty comfortable back there. I realize both Bulaga and Bahktiari have been fighting through injuries, but priority number 1 is protecting Rodgers, and these guys are not nearly as good as the Tauscher/Clifton combo from a decade ago.

    Offensive tackle is probably our biggest need in the draft, even though we have capable starters. We need to pull another Tauscher coup out of the draft.
    UserPostedImage
    nerdmann
    8 years ago

    We have a major problem on the offensive line/future salary. And that problem is that the best players are guards and they do not command a higher salary. We can't lose either one, but can't afford to pay both either. The other problem is that or tackles aren't tackle starter money. Rodger is still getting a lot of pressure from the pash rush, when he should be pretty comfortable back there. I realize both Bulaga and Bahktiari have been fighting through injuries, but priority number 1 is protecting Rodgers, and these guys are not nearly as good as the Tauscher/Clifton combo from a decade ago.

    Offensive tackle is probably our biggest need in the draft, even though we have capable starters. We need to pull another Tauscher coup out of the draft.

    Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



    I'd keep Sitton and Lang and ditch Bulaga. I've always been a Bulaga supporter, but he's lost something against speed rushers after all the knee injuries. Otherwise they'd have moved him over to LT when Bakh went down.

    Either way, we need a T. I wonder if Bakh could play on the right side.
    “Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
    yooperfan
    8 years ago

    I'd keep Sitton and Lang and ditch Bulaga

    Originally Posted by: nerdmann 


    I agree with this, but I wonder if Bulaga's exorbitant contract would prevent such a move.

    Fan Shout
    beast (7m) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
    packerfanoutwest (19m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
    Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky
    Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm
    Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
    Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
    Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!
    Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
    Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
    beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
    Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
    Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
    packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected
    Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
    Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
    beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
    beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
    Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
    beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
    beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
    beast (4h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
    Zero2Cool (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
    Zero2Cool (4h) : I literally just said it.
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
    Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
    Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
    Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division
    beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us
    beast (4h) : Packers will get in
    beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs
    packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
    Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
    buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
    Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
    beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
    bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
    Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
    Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
    Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
    buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?
    Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    2h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

    19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.