Packers needs analysis

Hawk deal details.

         BASE SALARY     ProRated SB     MISC. BONUS     CAP HIT
2012     $4,400,000.00   $1,600,000.00   $  550,000.00   $6,550,000.00 
2013     $4,900,000.00   $1,600,000.00   $  550,000.00   $7,050,000.00 
2014     $4,900,000.00   $1,600,000.00   $1,050,000.00   $7,550,000.00 
2015     $5,400,000.00   $1,600,000.00   $1,050,000.00   $8,050,000.00 

I think he plays 1 more year with GB.

So, if I'm reading that right...it means GB takes a $6.4 million cap hit by releasing Hawk, vs. $6.55 million if he stays in 2012.

If that's right, he's obviously staying in GB this season. He's an ok player, but he's clearly getting paid more than he's worth. I really think DJ Smith takes over the starting spot alongside Bishop this year. That's gonna be one pricey backup player.

quote:

Originally posted by Shoeless Joe:
Listen to chikky, he's so worldly & wise. Here's his 'go-to-guy'...

I understand why it happens from time to time, but please try to avoid quoting that moron directly.

It defeats the ignore by letting the stupid seep through, and it gives him the attention he craves.

Thank you.

Coach, you need to turn me back on and not get second hand reports. Some quality stuff you are missing.

quote:

Originally posted by Fond Du Arrigo:
So, if I'm reading that right...it means GB takes a $6.4 million cap hit by releasing Hawk, vs. $6.55 million if he stays in 2012.

If that's right, he's obviously staying in GB this season. He's an ok player, but he's clearly getting paid more than he's worth. I really think DJ Smith takes over the starting spot alongside Bishop this year. That's gonna be one pricey backup player.

Maybe I'm rong, but I read it as the $6.4 mil is the remaining prorated signing bonus money, but he would not be paid the $4.4 mil in base salary if he's cut. Thus, if cut his actual CAP hit would be $6.4 minus $4.4 or $2.0 mil, perhaps less based on how the misc bonus money of $550,000 is structured.

quote:

Originally posted by Coach:

quote:

Originally posted by Shoeless Joe:
Listen to chikky, he's so worldly & wise. Here's his 'go-to-guy'...

I understand why it happens from time to time, but please try to avoid quoting that moron directly.

It defeats the ignore by letting the stupid seep through, and it gives him the attention he craves.

Thank you.

Sorry coach, I just assumed you and pretty much everyone else had me on ignore too. I thought I was in one of those if a tree fell in the woods... things. Now that I know people can actually see my posts, I promise to do better.

quote:

Originally posted by chickenboy:

quote:

Originally posted by Pablo:
I know. If you read my post (in english) I say that TT will do what he likes to do and that excludes all the trades, FA signings and all that gossip that every year most people post.
He will follow his own recipe which OBVIOUSLY has worked incredibly well.
Personally would love to have one or two FA signings (as most people do!)

Keep up the good fight. There is a way of doing things around here by a large contingent of posters that is of a "follow" mentally that disregards basic logic. It's a black and white world and either TT does 100% right or 100% rong.

On the flip side, there's a small handful of complete dip****s on the board that continuously post irrational garbage and get called on it by the masses (You know.. the "Black and White people).

My apologies to Coachya.

What is irrational in your opinion? I don't read much that is irrational. The most irrational thing, IMO, was the "Dom will just turn it on" approach to a defense that horrible all year long. But I wouldn't tell anybody to STFU or call them a moron for actually believing that. Hell, I still want Marshawn Lynch and I don't really think that is irrational. I just think he is better than what they have and better than their third round pick (which is what I'm going with as the bounty). I can understand not wanting him but it wouldn't prompt me to tell that person to STFU or call them a moron.

quote:

Originally posted by chickenboy:
What is irrational in your opinion? I don't read much that is irrational. The most irrational thing, IMO, was the "Dom will just turn it on" approach to a defense that horrible all year long. But I wouldn't tell anybody to STFU or call them a moron for actually believing that. Hell, I still want Marshawn Lynch and I don't really think that is irrational. I just think he is better than what they have and better than their third round pick (which is what I'm going with as the bounty). I can understand not wanting him but it wouldn't prompt me to tell that person to STFU or call them a moron.

Sorry, just trying to educate Coach.

I'm sure he appreciates that GL.

quote:

Originally posted by DurangoDoug:

quote:

Originally posted by Fond Du Arrigo:
So, if I'm reading that right...it means GB takes a $6.4 million cap hit by releasing Hawk, vs. $6.55 million if he stays in 2012.

{snipped for silent killer awareness}

Maybe I'm rong, but I read it as the $6.4 mil is the remaining prorated signing bonus money,

{snipped for silent killer awareness}

If cut, the remaining pro-rated amount, $6.4mm, gets accelerated to this year. So, as Fond Du noted, it is a $6.4mm hit vs $6.55mm.

Would be nice if cpheph1 were around, he understood this better than I.

No worries. Not everything I contribute to the board is positive, but...I think I should stop right here.

True, but if cut he would not be paid the $4.4 mil base salary. So the Cap hit would be $6.4, but we save on not paying his base salary. SO end result is only a $2.0 mil actual hit towards our Cap limit, or am I missing something?

Nonetheless, I guess were stuck with Hawk for at least another year. Heck, maybe this talk in the media and elsewhere regarding his poor play lights a fire and he does much better in 2012.

The cap hit for 2012 is either
a) $6.55mm ($4.4mm base + $1.6mm pro-rated SB for 1 year + $.55mm misc bonus)
OR
b) $6.4mm (total of remaining SB not yet paid)

The savings on the cap would be in future years as the $1.6mm pro-rated annual amount for subsequent years would hit this year.

quote:

Originally posted by DurangoDoug:
.....he does much better in 2012.

We've seen his ceiling and it's not particularly high. I think TT just compounds his mistake by hanging onto him, but I suspect he's around for at least another year.

quote:

Originally posted by DurangoDoug:
True, but if cut he would not be paid the $4.4 mil base salary. So the Cap hit would be $6.4, but we save on not paying his base salary. SO end result is only a $2.0 mil actual hit towards our Cap limit, or am I missing something?

Nonetheless, I guess were stuck with Hawk for at least another year. Heck, maybe this talk in the media and elsewhere regarding his poor play lights a fire and he does much better in 2012.

Don't forget, we'd also be off the hook for his dental insurance if he were cut, so we've got that going for us, which is good.

But if Hawk is cut, we'd have to rely on a second year player to become a starter. That's irresponsible.

In all seriousness, TT made a mistake bringing Hawk back at that price, but a mistake I understand. Barnett is still worse than Hawk, Chillar was still hurt, and they had yet to draft Smith. Hawk had leverage last year and he used it to get paid (much like Ryan Grant from a few years ago). Still, I think Hawk is back next year but the best man wins the starting job (remember Hawk was benched in game 1 in 2010). Hawk is around for depth in 2012 and is let go in 2013 (depending on performance).

quote:

Originally posted by chickenboy:
What is irrational in your opinion? I don't read much that is irrational. The most irrational thing, IMO, was the "Dom will just turn it on" approach to a defense that horrible all year long. But I wouldn't tell anybody to STFU or call them a moron for actually believing that. Hell, I still want Marshawn Lynch and I don't really think that is irrational. I just think he is better than what they have and better than their third round pick (which is what I'm going with as the bounty). I can understand not wanting him but it wouldn't prompt me to tell that person to STFU or call them a moron.

Nailed it!

I can't fault TT at all for the Hawk signing but he needs a new crystal ball. Had he been able to foresee the development of both Smith and Newhouse things may have been very different. It's possible Brooks Reed could have been a Packer and Hawk wouldn't.

I think Wells is a priority to re-sign now since we don't have a viable backup plan. TT did try to prepare for the future with Nick McDonald, but he couldn't cut it last year (is playing with the Pats now).

I think Finley will be franchised. He needs to prove he can step up, and it will give the Packers a chance to better evaluate Quarless, DJ Williams, and Ryan Taylor with an off-season and full season to see if they can step up. I think TT will try to sign him to a 3-year deal, but I doubt he would want that based on his comments to the media.

Obviously the holes are pretty clear at OLB and DL. I see our DB and RB situation being pretty shaky.

Is T. Williams going to revert back to his play from the 2010 season? Same with Shields. Can Capers continue to use Woodson as a DB - his speed is only declining. House is a huge question mark. I don't see Lee coming back and losing Bush to FA.

RB is not a huge emphasis for the offense, but Starks regressed this year, Green is a complete unknown coming back from major injury and Saine is an unknown quantity.

TT will need to make some additions, but a lot of guys who the Packers need to be great have to step up from a subpar 2011 season (Starks, Finley, Raji, T. Williams, Shields).

It's been said over and over.. Nobody is making excuses for Shields, Woodson, Williams, etc... but if you don't have a pass rush, and GB didn't in 2011, any defensive back will look like crap. If GB adds somebody opposite CMIII that can play and they get better push from the DL, the secondary will look like they did in 2010 if not better.

If TT gets the defense fixed, the offense will be just fine as is.