Packer 2021 Team Discussion (Rodgers Out Vs. Chiefs)

[adambr2]

I see a lot of contracts that have figures stated both as *guaranteed* and *fully guaranteed*.

 

Maybe some of his 2022 salary is guaranteed for injury only?

 

Are those terms actually different, though, or just people using the same terms interchangeably? My understanding is, and has always been, that the money can't be conditional in any way, (I.E., you need to be on a roster to get a roster bonus). I obviously could be completely wrong on that, I acknowledge though.

 

I think the terms are actually different because I typically see them stated as separate amounts.

 

My thought/theory is that Lewis has 2.1M of full guarantees, and at his age, wanted some insurance in case an injury in 2021 prevented him from playing again. So he got some additional money guaranteed for injury only for 2022 with the idea that if something does happen injury wise, he still gets paid one more year. If not, he will likely be cut and lose that additional money but also will be healthy and therefore likely welcomed back again for a similar 2M or so deal for 2022. Either way, he's probably set for 2 more years unless his performance drops off a cliff in '21.

 

Here's the most recent information I could find on guarantees which to me at least somewhat supports my theory:

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/chiefs/gm-report/the-art-of-nfl-contracts-part-1-the-basics

[pacopete4]

Yes! Good news. Another signing to make #12 happy!

[OldHeidelberg]

While I suppose he could be cut in camp if they gave him a $2.1 million signing bonus his first year base is essentially guaranteed as well so maybe that is the discrepancy in the numbers we have heard. Glad to have him back, I don't mind the bringing most of the same team back, we were close, but like others have said we could do that and bring in Watt(or another need FA) if we were willing to sell out the future a bit. But the Packers don't do this, and the cap reduction further reduced their options this offseason. We need a great draft and hopefully some guys from last years to step up as we probably won't be so healthy again.

 

Is the Adams extension a given now that Rodgers doesn't seem like he will be restructured? Have to free up room for these contracts and the rookies somehow.

[adambr2]

While I suppose he could be cut in camp if they gave him a $2.1 million signing bonus his first year base is essentially guaranteed as well so maybe that is the discrepancy in the numbers we have heard. Glad to have him back, I don't mind the bringing most of the same team back, we were close, but like others have said we could do that and bring in Watt(or another need FA) if we were willing to sell out the future a bit. But the Packers don't do this, and the cap reduction further reduced their options this offseason. We need a great draft and hopefully some guys from last years to step up as we probably won't be so healthy again.

 

Is the Adams extension a given now that Rodgers doesn't seem like he will be restructured? Have to free up room for these contracts and the rookies somehow.

 

I don't think he got a 2.1M signing bonus from what I've heard. 2.1M could be his all-in guarantee for the first year including signing bonus and base.

[adambr2]

I don't know who remembers this but after Lewis' first year here, he had some pretty critical things to say about the Packers "dysfunctional" offense and the relationship between McCarthy and Rodgers. He even called out Rodgers directly for completely changing McCarthy's play call in the huddle and said it shocked him.

 

Never thought he would be back after that, much less become a mainstay.

[HiAndTight]

If 4 million is guaranteed that's an absolute head scratcher, because then we're basically going to be paying him 1/4, even if it's not all charged this year. How does the market for Lewis nearly double at age 36 in a depressed market in which we don't have a major need for Lewis and he didn't do anything significant that his market would have changed? Why wouldn't this just be 1 year for around 2M and done?

 

If it's actually 4 million guaranteed, it's actually a two-year deal with cap numbers of 2 point whatever each year, in all likelihood.

 

We should also keep in mind that part of the last CBA(or mini CBA) there was a provision in there that allowed a team to sign a veteran for roughly 2.5 million and have that only count 950K against the cap. That was before this season IIRC when they were negotiating the extended rosters, etc...they'd be playing with through Covid.

 

So I think it's entirely possible they signed him to a two year contract that may effectively be a veterans minimum as far as the cap is concerned.

[HiAndTight]

He played over 400 snaps last year, so I'd disagree that his role was minimal, despite not catching a lot of balls. If any of those other guys were above-average blockers, he might be expendable, but they are all more receiving TEs, even though Tonyan has apparently improved his blocking.

 

 

For a team that has big questions about it's OL as of now, Lewis could be even more important this year. Even if we draft a really good OT in the 1st round, Bahk will almost certainly start the year in the PUP list.

 

And if you listen to Rodgers on the Mcafee show, he was maybe the most popular locker room presence and among the most respected players on the roster.

 

This is almost like fortifying the OL and keeping the veteran leadership in place.

 

 

If they were to extend Adams and find a way to land Janoris Jenkins, I'd be feeling pretty good heading into the draft.

 

Edit-I didn't even notice that Jenkins had signed a deal with the Titans a week ago.

[HiAndTight]

King is fine. Could he be upgraded, sure. He plays opposite Alexander, stands to reason teams will challenge King more. He hasn't been a sieve where teams score huge plays at will against time after time after time.

 

R-E-L-A-X

 

(this is not to suggest that discussion about him should not take place but it feels a little dramatic at times)

 

 

I totally agree. Also, some of the names being thrown out to replace him....Sherman for example. I honestly think at this point, Sherman would be worse in our defense than King.

 

King had a very bad game against a very deep WR'ing core vs the Buccs, but he's been a competent starter and worth a pretty meager contract.

 

Most people assumed he'd get a pretty nice contract in free agency just based on his size and his speed. Instead, we bring him back on another one year deal that incentivizes him. And it certainly doesn't seem as though we're just going to stand pat at CB.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

To be fair, 2020 was a contract year and did very little to incentivize him as far as results go.

[PeaveyFury]

I do think the assumption has to be that they'll supplement King with a 1st or 2nd round draft choice there. Doesn't mean they're a lock to do so as they're not a lock to do anything, but I think it's fair to say we should let the rest of the offseason play out to see if it truly is 'King or bust' at the position, or whether they give themselves more options.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Kevin King's contract comes with a 2021 cap hit of $1,887,500 and a 2022 dead cap of $3,000,000 for the Green Bay Packers.

 

 

Pretty reasonable, considering.

[pacopete4]

Nice! Make it better knowing that it didn't cost a bunch.

[PeaveyFury]

Well, that's a Russ Ball special. And should definitively answer the 'why King not Fuller argument', as $1.8 < $9.5.

 

Looks like it's really a 1/$4.75m contract for King essentially as far as 'cash received', and the Packers have a minimal cap hit.

[Jaylyn]

I agree, one more run with Rodgers, then the Jordan Love era begins.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/samson-packers-will-move-on-from-aaron-rodgers-after-2021-season/

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I don't think so. All the Packers have done is the smart thing, which is clearly commit to keeping talent and leaving the option open with Rodgers next season. They don't have to appease Rodgers at the expense of their own flexibility. He's another player and can pound sand if he doesn't like it; his best interest is to play MVP football again. They've just made the choice to not be bullied into doing something too soon to appease Aaron Rodgers. They hold the time card, they may as well play it.

 

If he does that, they likely hang on to him, if he's just ok, or gets hurt, they can move on with some pieces in place for Love.

 

But I don't buy for one second that the Packers have set in stone that Rodgers is gone after this season. They're just not that dumb.

[pacopete4]

I don't think he knows anything more than a casual poster on these boards. The Packers want options. I don't blame them for that. If they hit on Love, it makes it an easy call to move on from an aging QB that costs a lot of money.

[adambr2]

Where's the line in the sand with Rodgers where you move on to Love? Is it only if he falls off a cliff completely and you just end up having to release him?

 

Or if he has one of those good but not great years like 2019 where you can still get compensation for him are you selling while you can?

[pacopete4]

I think it starts with Love. If the Packers like what they see in practices and preseason games (much like they did with Rodgers), then it opens up the conversation that they can move on from Rodgers. Then it comes down to what you see in Rodgers. If a step decline in play (unlikely), it is a no-brainer. If he looks more average, you probably leverage his name for a return. If he ends up playing elite level, you continue to take your shot with him.

[pacopete4]

Malcolm Butler gets a 1yr and up to $6M contract from the Cardinals. He is someone I would have taken over King but I doubt he is going to be paid basically the vet league minimum either. Will be interesting to see the details there.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I think it starts with Love. If the Packers like what they see in practices and preseason games (much like they did with Rodgers), then it opens up the conversation that they can move on from Rodgers. Then it comes down to what you see in Rodgers. If a step decline in play (unlikely), it is a no-brainer. If he looks more average, you probably leverage his name for a return. If he ends up playing elite level, you continue to take your shot with him.

 

Exactly. It's a complicated situation that needs time and game situations to figure out and making a decision on it a year before you have to doesn't make any sense. Unless you think Rodgers will sabotage 2021 because he's bitter.

[adambr2]

I just don't think King is very good. I can live with him as depth but that's about it.

 

His best year, 2019, he was basically statistically average overall and that was with really high level red zone performance which is something that has been shown not to be a sustainable metric.

 

I think particularly with guys who are longer tenured Packers who get a 2nd or 3rd deal, we often try to talk ourselves into thinking that they are better players than they really are and in general they continue to perform at the same mediocre level. AJ Hawk, Brad Jones, BJ Raji, etc.

[adambr2]

I think it starts with Love. If the Packers like what they see in practices and preseason games (much like they did with Rodgers), then it opens up the conversation that they can move on from Rodgers. Then it comes down to what you see in Rodgers. If a step decline in play (unlikely), it is a no-brainer. If he looks more average, you probably leverage his name for a return. If he ends up playing elite level, you continue to take your shot with him.

 

Exactly. It's a complicated situation that needs time and game situations to figure out and making a decision on it a year before you have to doesn't make any sense. Unless you think Rodgers will sabotage 2021 because he's bitter.

 

Makes sense. I agree with both of you on that. And I hope that Rodgers would be a little more professional than that, but after the Favre saga, I'm not assuming anything about anyone.

[CheezWizHed]

I think it starts with Love. If the Packers like what they see in practices and preseason games (much like they did with Rodgers), then it opens up the conversation that they can move on from Rodgers. Then it comes down to what you see in Rodgers. If a step decline in play (unlikely), it is a no-brainer. If he looks more average, you probably leverage his name for a return. If he ends up playing elite level, you continue to take your shot with him.

 

Yeah, I'd agree with this. Both pieces need to be there. Love has to look good and Rodgers has to look bad to cut-bait. In 2018/2019, his QBR was still strong 90+, but his completion percentage was low for him (~62%). And I remember a bunch of VERY uncharacteristic throws (5 yards over a WR's head). Since his has worked on his footing and core last offseason, I really doubt much regression.

[adambr2]

I will say though that even if Love has a great camp, it's tough to know what you have until he gets regular season reps.

 

I think MM was certain he had something there with Brett Hundley and it just did not work out at all. Not comparing Hundley to Love, but you just don't really know for sure without the live game action against other starters.

[CheezWizHed]

True, but if he looks bad in pre-season that gives Rodgers more leash, IMO.

 

A Rodgers injury would also make things complicated....

 

Maybe the best outcome is for Rodgers to throw 5500 yards, 56 TD, 0INTs, win MVP, SuperBowl, Super Bowl MVP and then retire on top.