Current Cap Situation

by Bezerkers on Feb 13, 2012 9:24 AM CST

There's been quite a few articles on here recently regarding free agency and how the Packers should approach it. The other day I ran across this site showing the current 2012 cap hits for all the players. The current cap hit is roughly 110 million, which doesn't include draft picks for obvious reasons. I can't give an exact number for this years draft but I think a safe estimate would be around 5 million, which puts us at 115 million. I've seen estimates of the 2012 cap being 121 - 125 million, so I'll just split the difference and call 123 million. This means the Packers have potentially 8 million to play with in free agency, but should they do anything?

Of course I'm not figuring in the savings that could be made by releasing players or restructuring anyone's current contract, but as things stand now, I don't think they should go after anyone in free agency. I think instead the money should go towards locking up some of the younger players that are due to hit free agency soon. The following is a list of players coming off their rookie deals that are due to hit free agency after the season:

Crabtree, Detrich-Smith, Francois, B. Jones, Lang, Masthay, Shields, Wynn, and Zombo. Other free agents to note include Peprah, Jennings, and Goode.

That is a lot of talent that could potentially walk after the season. Lang, Masthay, Shields, and Jennings are ones that I would say must be resigned. Zombo, Jones, Peprah, and Crabtree all provide decent depth but may be replaceable with younger cheaper parts. Goode is one I'm not sure of. You never hear his name, but that's probably a good thing for a long snapper and I'm not sure how easy it is to replace them.

What are your thoughts? Should the Packers focus on resigning some of these guys, or even work on new deals for Raji, Matthews, or Rodgers, or should they look to replace some of these guys in free agency?

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Lang, Masthey and Shields are keepers..

the rest are just guys. EDS can stay for the min, or a little more since he basically IS the depth on the interior OL. The big ??? is Wells. Do we need him or is he just another guy that gets replaced? He can go either way, and I’ve been on both sides and can’t make up my mind about him. EDS might be his replacement. But then we have to draft an OG or 2 again… But thats Thompsons MO to draft a couple OL each year anyway. All the rest are just guys that we don’t know about yet.

The Packers are going to have to come up w/ some big $$$ to keep Matthews Raji and Rodgers. They should keep the money for those guys. No one in FA really is gonna put the Pack over the top except maybe Mario Williams and he is going to go to a 43 team in all likelihood to a team willing to pay him. Packers aren’t that team, IMO…

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Feb 13, 2012 11:23 AM CST reply actions

The big ??? is Wells. Do we need him or is he just another guy that gets replaced? He can go either way, and I’ve been on both sides and can’t make up my mind about him.

Yeah, I used to think he was just a guy — after this past season I’m not sure. He’s not a guy who’s gonna dominate somebody but he’s pretty good in protection, and does a good job with the calls (according to McCarthy). The more I think about it, I think he can be replaced.

Agreed about those 3 getting big money but maybe Raji will be a little cheaper then we all thought he’d be after 2010.

One thing that’s worth mentioning is that Clifton and Driver are probably gone, which will save us money. Another thing that will free up some money for those three is Pickett and Woodson’s contracts coming off the books.

by packallday555 on Feb 13, 2012 4:56 PM CST up reply actions

I'm not so sure about this.

but maybe Raji will be a little cheaper then we all thought he’d be after 2010.

I have gotten the impression that Raji was being a good soldier and doing what was being asked of him this season, and that his playmaking numbers were down more because of how he was being used, than because of the quality of his play.

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence!"

After further review,
The Munsters of the Midway still suck,
Skol is a four-letter word,
abd those upstarts in Detroit couldn't beat the Little Sisters of the Poor.

by NorthStarr on Feb 13, 2012 9:37 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

That was my line of thinking too.

Hell, would I like to see Raji’s numbers improve? Sure. But what he does helps someone else on that front 7 to make a play. The problem is that there really was not that person to be that playmaker so his efforts were nobly wasted. I think Raji’s performance will go through the roof when people will have to start accounting for others and drawing attention away from him and Clay.

That dog just won't hunt.

by Bush League All Star on Feb 15, 2012 1:29 AM CST up reply actions

Crabtree, Zombo, Francois, Shields & Masthay are all going to be RFAs

So, it shouldn’t be too expensive to retain them if we wish to.

As for the others:
Lang is solid enough, but I wouldn’t mind picking up an interior lineman in the middle rounds to replace him in the long term. EDS is an adequate back-up, but I don’t think he’ll ever be much more than that.
Francois, Jones & Wynn are all fringe starters, guys who can be role players, but shouldn’t be starting all 16 games.

If they want to be paid like starters, let them walk; if they’ll accept being rotational/role players, bring them back at a reasonable price.

13.

"Skip, once again, stop it; Be an analyst; don't be a douchebag."

by Wiedmann on Feb 13, 2012 5:18 PM CST reply actions

I would imagine Lang getting something just below what Sitton got.

I don’t see it going 6 years but I could see 4 to 5 years at 4 to 5 million a year. Shields is the one I could see having a breakout year and getting an in-season deal similar to what Williams got.

by Bezerkers on Feb 13, 2012 6:00 PM CST up reply actions

I think that's way too high for Lang

$3 mil/yr max

13.

"Skip, once again, stop it; Be an analyst; don't be a douchebag."

by Wiedmann on Feb 13, 2012 6:34 PM CST up reply actions

Thats a tough one...

I know Wells contract was for 3M per when he signed after only one year. But the pay for OG has gone up and Colledge signed for 5.5M? per… I think Lang has turned out to be an upgrade over Colledge, so signing Lang is gonna cost a little more. I’m guessing he gets 4.5 per. Still less than Sitton and Colledge got, but he’s only started one year. I like him, and want him back. Don’t know that he should get 5M per, but slightly less, IMO.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Feb 13, 2012 9:53 PM CST up reply actions

Colledge got overpaid

Good luck to Lang if he can get that kind of money; I just hope it’s not with the Packers.

13.

"Skip, once again, stop it; Be an analyst; don't be a douchebag."

by Wiedmann on Feb 14, 2012 1:35 AM CST up reply actions

Stability may be worth a little extra $$$

aaaaaaaaahh, I gotta go!!

by b3nihana on Feb 14, 2012 1:14 PM CST up reply actions

Colledge was the starter last year

Would you have liked to pay him $27.5 mil over 5 years for the sake of stability?

13.

"Skip, once again, stop it; Be an analyst; don't be a douchebag."

by Wiedmann on Feb 14, 2012 3:29 PM CST up reply actions

I dont know how you twisted that

into me wanting colledge for 27.5 mil over 5 yrs. Nice interpretation. I’m saying if we can get a reasonable deal for Lang, spending a little extra is worth it. Say 3.5 mil/yr, suck it up and pay.

aaaaaaaaahh, I gotta go!!

by b3nihana on Feb 15, 2012 9:00 AM CST up reply actions

Just testing

"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root

by Clutch16 on Feb 24, 2012 7:18 AM CST reply actions