HarveysWBs

Well, this was my first time watching this McAfee show, and I think if it isn’t my last, I will have made some poor choices (the conversation is inane, and that’s why I spend more time here for sports talk than YouTube or ESPN). It feels like most of the bandaid is off now, and that in and of itself is a kind of relief. I have loved the winning and some of the most unbelievable throws I have ever seen and am likely to ever see from anyone in a Packer uniform. I’m sorry to see it end but cognizant of the realities of football as a business and am hoping Rodgers and the Packers can get something valuable out of this. I find a lot of how this conversation has gone to be fascinating, but often in a prurient way (as anything even tangentially related to celebrity is), so I’m trying to leave aside the “he said, he said” stuff—perhaps not entirely successfully. Two things still elicit a comment from me: one, that Rodgers keeps insisting that there aren’t bad guys here, and two, that since he’s the only one talking, we should take his version as the whole truth by default (no one here is really suggesting this, but Rodgers broadcasting his version in this way knowing the Packers won’t respond in kind is certainly suggestive of this attitude on his part). Firstly, I agree that there aren’t any “bad guys” in this, but I’m also of a mind that there may not be any good ones, either—but more to the point, that seeing the situation in terms of such a stark moral dichotomy is probably unhelpful. My fear is that, to put it more accurately, there may not be any competent guys here. For all Rodgers’ brilliance, his increasing demands in terms of compensation and personnel were not, in the last year at least, in any way outweighed by his on-field performance, and that doesn’t even take into consideration the off-field things that go along with the whole Aaron Rodgers experience (which I can fairly easily overlook as a fan, but as an organization, I can understand why they would be tiresome). While it is a mark of greatness that the greatest don’t often know when it is time to go, it has become abundantly clear to most inside and outside the organization that Rodgers at 40, at the price tag of $60 million, and a roster loaded with aging friends that all range from decent to non-contributing players is not exactly a viable formula for even short-term success. Good luck to the Jets on that front. But there are two sides to this thing, and the brass doesn’t look completely competent in all this, either. Let me say that I’m not of the opinion that a house-clearing is necessary right now, but the next couple years are going to be a massive measuring stick for every level of the team. I’m not angry about this, since nearly every decision made has been fairly defensible at the time (apart from Mark Murphy’s seeming inability to avoid going into public settings to take sideways digs at his franchise quarterback). Case in point: whatever Love turns into now, it was quite logical to take a quarterback that year. As the NFL routinely shows, quarterbacks are like fire starters in the wilderness: if you have one, you have none, and if you have two, you have one. But nevertheless, Gute chose Love as his quarterback, just like MLF chose Barry to be his D coordinator (and without Rodgers in the fold, being a hold on Barry is a much weirder call), and all of it is Murphy’s team. I’m all for trusting the process, but the point of the process is to get the right results. That’s harder without a Hall of Famer under center, so we’re about to see what everybody is made of. Secondly, and much more succinctly, I’m not etching anything from that interview in stone. I’m not calling anyone a liar, but we all have solid evidence, presented to our very eyes and ears, that Rodgers enjoys parsing his own words very carefully. It is entirely likely to me that every thing he said on that show was factually accurate in the bleedingly precise sense that he meant it, and that he can always make a sophistical case to that effect if facts ever came out to the contrary. “I’m immunized” is the only proof I need of this. In the end, though, I’m only really interested in two results here. First, that the truth gets told and remembered in all things, not least of which Rodgers being recognized as, at minimum, a Mt. Rushmore player in Packers history. And secondly, that Rodgers and the Packers both get out of this situation better than they entered it. Thankfully, I see no reason why we can’t get both those results, so here’s hoping.

Hopefully by throwing a game-sealing pick to Jaire Alexander in a Minnesota-hosted NFC championship game, yes.

Re: leverage, the only thing that I could see changing this situation is if the Jets pivot. The only QB available that is better than Rodgers is Lamar Jackson. He’d cost more draft capital, though, and it seems that breaking the bank to get him would make one a pariah. Maybe Woody Johnson is old enough to risk that. Or maybe they opt for Stafford. He’s not in Rodgers tier, but he can win a title under the right circumstances. That wouldn’t be enough for New York media and fans, perhaps, but might be livable as an on-field decision. Until one of the above two scenarios gets in motion, I don’t mind another turn or two of the screws.

The funniest part re:Waller is that the Packers did in fact beat that deal with their offer last year. But the Raiders rejected the offer, Waller sat out the last third of the season with an injury (and probably wouldn’t have gotten the Packers to the promised land even if he was healthy, if you ask me—and I like Waller), and now the Raiders only get a third rounder. Things worked out ok from where I sit. That being said, I wouldn’t hate Waller for a third rounder. But at his age and price point, might as well use a day two pick on Washington from Georgia. I’m cool with building for tomorrow. For the first time in a while, the future seems like an adventure, and not just another February 2nd in Punxsutawney.

Man the Panthers are silly. They must be really sure they’ve got a bead on an awesome QB. Not sure I’d take that shot on this class. The Rodgers haul is going to be a tad underwhelming after this, methinks.

There’s a lot of fog of war type stuff floating around right now, so it is hard to know anything for sure. Personally, I think both sides are motivated enough to make sure a deal gets done (assuming 12 doesn’t get squishy in the next few days or something weird). But I find it immensely humorous that Jets Twitter is increasingly under the impression that the delay is owing to Woody Johnson being a tightwad and squeezing the Packers on Rodgers’ salary. As a Brewers fan, the overlap between Woody Johnson discourse and Mark Attanasio discourse tickles me.

You are absolutely correct, I spaced it and did not stick the landing on my breakdown at all--which is why nobody pays me for this. So, continuing the back of the envelope math, we can speculate as to the hit we'll take on additional draft picks using the estimates put out by overthecap.com. Assuming dealing Rodgers now and keeping all our current draft picks puts us more or less at the salary cap, every pick added puts us over the cap and would require a subsequent cut that at least matches their cap number. The Jets' 1st round pick (#13) is projected to have a cap hit of $3.4m in 2023. Their 2nd round pick (#43): $1.6m. 3rd round (#74): $1m. Just for fun, here's the cap hits for each of the top three picks for some other possible landing spots: Raiders: (#7) $4.8m, (#38) $1.7m, (#70) $1m Dolphins: (no 1st, punished for the Brady tampering fiasco), (#51) $1.3m, (#77) $1m Panthers: (#9) $4.2m, (#39) $1.7m, (#61) $1.1m Titans: (#11) $3.8m, (#41) $1.6m, (#72) $1m Colts: (#4) $6.6m, (#35) $1.8m, (#79) $1m So, all in all, trading him now seems pretty financially viable. The complicating factor would be if the buying team starts to get cute and expect Gutey and Ball to pick up some of Rodgers' salary, or if Rodgers balks at restructuring his deal for the buying team, which would (presumably) lower our draft pick haul considerably.

Ok, so Ken Ingalls is the best source I know of for this stuff, and he had a detailed breakdown in his 2023 preview article. Basically: -If Rodgers returns to GB this year, he costs $31.62m against the cap, and that is unalterable. If he then leaves the team next year, his cap hit would have to immediately account for dead money at $60.21m, and $76.8m if he leaves in 2025. Hence, a return is financially unpalatable to the brass, to say the least. - If he retires, the team would do whatever it takes to ensure Rodgers cooperated with coordinating the retirement to happen post-June 1st, which would mean splitting his $40.31m dead cap hit out at $15.83 this year and $24.48. Otherwise, the whole amount goes against the ‘23 cap. For reasons discussed elsewhere and in light of recent events, the retirement scenario seems least likely of all, so we can simply move on to trades. - A trade pre-June 1st would result in the above-mentioned $40.31 dead cap hit for this year, BUT we’d be able to get 2023 draft picks back if the deal was consummated before the draft in April. - A trade post-June 1st allows for the same $15/25m cap split as the retirement scenario. - Either trade scenario means the acquiring team has Rodgers at only $15.79m against the cap this year, which is nice, because his subsequent cap hits are far less team friendly. What does this all mean for the 2023 cap if he’s traded now? Ingalls projects (on his pinned tweet) that we’d have $9.1m in cap space after our draft with the picks currently in hand and no more FA deals or restructures (this number would obviously be smaller if we got high picks back in a trade). In short, we would need to close a 30-40m gap. I leave it to others to speculate how we would do that. (This last sentence is obviously wrong on the math. See Chorizo's correction below.)

Working on the theory that if Rodgers comes back, Love probably won’t: the need to use a higher pick on a QB skyrockets in the event Rodgers returns, right? There’s a ton of pressure on this draft, because the team is either in transition this year or next, you’d have to think. So Gute has to plan for both the possibility of a reload AND a soft rebuild. If it’s the season of Love, then you can draft for a rebuild while you see what the kid has, and get your cap situation straightened out a little. If Rodgers is back, I’d assume one or two needs have to be met via free agency, and whatever financial shenanigans or cap casualties have to happen to make that work probably happens (bye, Jones, you’ll be missed). Any solid FA safeties likely to be out there?

The saddest thing about this scenario being necessary? Among NL teams, the Brewers have the third-best record against teams that are currently above .500. Better than any of the wild card contenders, and better than even St. Louis. But the Cards, Braves, Phillies, and Padres have beat the ever living snot out of the bad teams, while the Brewers have just played with their food. And that's how you miss the playoffs. Of course, the Crew can partially make up for that with a very strong finish over the last week and a half. But it should never have been necessary in the first place.

The saddest thing about this scenario being necessary? Among NL teams, the Brewers have the third-best record against teams that are currently above .500. Better than any of the wild card contenders, and better than even St. Louis. But the Cards, Braves, Phillies, and Padres have beat the ever living snot out of the bad teams, while the Brewers have just played with their food. And that's how you miss the playoffs. Of course, the Crew can partially make up for that with a very strong finish over the last week and a half. But it should never have been necessary in the first place.

This is a weird trade on so many levels. Two (likely) playoff teams in the same league, the most dominant reliever in the game exchanging hands mid-year—and while the Brewers are amidst a division race and smack dab in the middle of their competitive window, and after the Brewers had fielded so many calls for years about Hader and always declined. Obviously, a multitude of questions come to mind: what do the Brewers know about Hader that makes them think now was the time to move him? What do they see in the (largely major-league ready) talent coming back that made them pull the trigger? Does the brass remain confident in the team’s chances for this year (hence the major-leaguers or major-league adjacent return)? Is this step one in a larger deadline strategy? I am a little underwhelmed at first blush, and I think that’s a factor of two elements: 1) I was gearing up for a winter trade, assuming we’d want Hader in the fold for the stretch run and playoffs at least on more time and 2) I kind of figured Hader would yield prospects as part of a build for the future type move. Basically, the timing surprised me a lot and is making me reevaluate my expectations a little. But more is sure to come.