Cutting David Bakhtiari Is a Bigger Risk Than Keeping Him
Letting Bakhtiari go should be the last resort for the Packers.
By markoldacres
The future of David Bakhtiari has been a hot topic in recent weeks. Brian Gutekunst was non-committal on Green Bay’s left tackle at his latest press conference, calling the situation: “an off-season decision”.
Despite returning to All-Pro form after recovering from a devastating string of knee problems, many are wondering whether the Packers should cut bait with Bakhtiari ahead of the 2023 season.
Why would they do that? Well, the common answer is that Bakhtiari’s knee presents too much of a risk going forward, especially given the hefty salary he is set to make across the 2023 and 2024 seasons.
Bakhtiari turns 32 next September, and Green Bay will have the option of plugging Zach Tom, who has looked serviceable in spot duty, or Yosh Nijman, who has proven himself to be a starting-calibre tackle, into the left tackle position in 2023.
The Packers can also save $17.5million against the salary cap in 2023 with a post-June release or trade of Bakhtiari.
However, the bigger risk may not be keeping Bakhtiari, but letting him go.
Given the now-significant injury concerns that will follow him for the remainder of his career, it’s unlikely the Packers will be able to procure any worthwhile draft capital in a trade for Bakhtiari, meaning they’d have to release him straight up.
What would be the real benefit of that? The additional cap space would be nice, but Green Bay won’t be able to replace Bakhtiari’s play next year no matter how much money they have.
Gutekunst put it best: “Left tackles don’t grow on trees”. Teams don’t just throw elite ones away in case they get injured.
The Packers know far more about Bakhtiari’s knee than anyone outside the organisation. They probably feel confident they can manage his knee effectively to keep him on the field, and playing at a high level, for at least the next two seasons he’s under contract.
Of course, there’s risk to keeping Bakhtiari, but there is a potential reward, too. Cutting him loose also comes with risk, and what is the real reward? What if Bakhtiari goes on to play at a high level for several more seasons in another uniform?
The Packers are already all in. All in on this team and specifically, their quarterback, at least for next year. It’s therefore difficult to see the sense in releasing Bakhtiari, a move that would likely not go down well with Aaron Rodgers.
This decision doesn’t exist in a vacuum, which is often how these types of issues are discussed.
Would the Packers sign a nearly-32-year-old left tackle with a suspect knee to a two-year, $62million deal (essentially Bakhtiari’s cap hit for the next two years) in free agency? Probably not, but that’s not the question.
It’s more likely the Packers either restructure Bakhtiari’s contract or negotiate a new one, which could help them out in terms of cap space over the next season or two.
Considering the team have stuck by Bakhtiari through his injury woes, he may even be amiable to some new language which could protect the team in the event his knee prevents him from playing again.
All of these options will likely be explored as the Packers attempt to navigate what is definitely a sticky off-season issue, but expect cutting Bakhtiari to be a last resort.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Mark Oldacres is a sports writer from Birmingham, England and a Green Bay Packers fan. You can follow him on twitter at @MarkOldacres
__________________________
Comments (52)
canadapacker
December 12, 2022 at 06:11 pm
I totally agree that it is probably not feasible to cut him outright - but also think - unless Bak is represented by Drew Rosenhaus - they will re-negotiate and he will probably agree - He was guaranteed $61 Million - dont know what is left - maybe he can be extended one year with not much extra guaranteed ( some sweetener) but provide the Pack with cap space without much Dead Cap.
PackyCheese500
December 12, 2022 at 07:03 pm
The way I see it, the Packers have no choice but to cut or trade him after June 1st. The 2023 Salary Cap cannot be navigated any other way.
Why would we re-negotiate to keep an expensive 32 year old LT who will likely never play more than 2/3 of the games in any future seasons, especially when we have a young, cheap candidate to replace him in Zach Tom?
Leatherhead
December 12, 2022 at 07:46 pm
You got some unexplained downvotes,500, but you are on target with this.
Tom has one decent outing at LT; Nijman and Jenkins both have quite a few.
Nijman is RFA, so we can keep him and put him at LT. Jenkins should be signed to a long-term deal as our C. Leave Runyan at LT, move Myers to RG, and start Tom at RT. That is a good line if it can be healthy.
Behind, we have Caleb and Walker, Rhyan, Newman and Hanson. Some of them should be better than they were this year, but I'd still add some Day Two talent on the line because I want the strongest Oline in the league.
PackyCheese500
December 12, 2022 at 09:12 pm
Thanks, LH. I’m right with you on wanting a strong offensive line. The reason why Detroit has one of the best offenses in the league (and the reason behind the success of Jamaal Williams and Jared Goff, I suspect) is because the Lions have one of the leagues best offensive lines. Having a good o-line makes every aspect of an offense better.
I like the creativity you bring to shuffling the offensive like, but something to consider is that Jenkins will want to be paid in 2023. The highest paid Guard, Nelson of the Colts, earns 20m annually. 18m annually is probably the least he’d accept. I don’t know if the Packers have the cap space to accomplish that; remember, they have to run and maintain a whole roster in 2023.
However, I do believe the Packers can carve out enough cap space before the new league year to place the Franchise Tag on Jenkins and trade him like the did with Davante last year (probably to an OL needy team like the Steelers or Raiders) for a second round pick. Doing so would get us some additional draft capital that we wouldn’t have if we just let him walk. If the Packers can create enough cap space to bring him back, then that would be amazing; although I have checked, and it isn’t likely.
However, there are some excellent prospects they can draft next year to fill Jenkins’ spot at Guard. O’Cyrus Torrence of Florida, Andrew Vorhees of USC, Cooper Beebe of Kansas State, and Peter Skoronski of Northwestern.
dobber
December 12, 2022 at 09:34 pm
"18m annually is probably the least he’d accept. I don’t know if the Packers have the cap space to accomplish that; remember, they have to run and maintain a whole roster in 2023."
Remember not to get caught thinking in terms of AAV. Actual yearly cap hit is a very different thing. I don't see the Packers letting Jenkins get away, and they'll likely give him a deal that keeps his first two years of cap hits very manageable,
Thegreatreynoldo
December 13, 2022 at 03:38 am
The issue is would you pay Bakh $16.2M in 2023? The next issue is whether you would pay Bakh $37.7M over two years? The two year, $62M figure is just a red herring.
I am much in sympathy with the article's premise. I am not anxious to release or even trade Bakh. I don't know what the medical staff is saying. Sounds like they have been off on this one, but the human body has quirks such that it isn't subject to certainty but is something of an art.
Leatherhead
December 13, 2022 at 11:55 am
The Eagles' offensive line looks pretty good, too. In fact, you look at any good scoring offense and the line is getting it done, because nothing else matters if you don't get people blocked.
Let's talk about Jenkins. He came back early this year from a big injury, and many players have said you're not really all the way back, mentally and physically, until the next season. Everybody knows he's good, everybody knows he's versatile.
I don't think you put the strongest offensive line in the league on the field by trading away your best, most versatile guy. So my orientation is definitely keeping this guy. We can't replace him with a 2nd round draft pick.
Spotrac calculates his value at about $22 million over 3 years, by comparing him to what similar players have received in the past. To me, that seems a bargain for a guy like him.
I would aim for a staring Oline of Nijman at Left Tackle (where he has numerous starts and has done well), Runyan at LG (where he has played well for years) Jenkins at Center, probably Myers at RG, and Tom at right tackle. The backups, currently, would be Rhyan, Walker, Jones, Newman, Hanson. If you're comfortable with that (and I'm not), you can stand pat, but you could also draft a Top 100 Olineman to add to the mix and maybe force Hanson or Newman off the roster. That would be what I'd do, because I want to put the best offensive line in the league on the field, and that means your #9 guy has to be a player because it's a long season and guys get hurt.
Thegreatreynoldo
December 13, 2022 at 03:44 am
That's an okay offensive line, probably at best. Nijman is only okay, Myers is below average, Runyan is likely to be average plus, and Tom is an unknown, so Jenkins would likely be the only above average starter.
Coldworld
December 13, 2022 at 06:46 am
I think Nijman is better than just OK. There has been some adjustment moving to RT, but he held up very well on the left previously. I see no reason why he won’t settle in similarly at RT.
PackyCheese500
December 13, 2022 at 07:28 am
You think Nijman is only average? You do realize that, around mid November, he led the NFL in pass-block win rate among OTs and ranked second in run block win rate, right? I don’t know his current stats because I’m not subscribed to pff. If Tom can bulk up in the off-season and continue his promising trajectory, we will have a top tackle duo for years to come.
Yosh is a key cog of our O-line. Jon Runyan also has not been getting enough credit, too. Above-average is a fair assessment, though, in my opinion.
Myers, in my opinion, the jury is still out on, but I agree, for now, he’s below average. I like Brian Gutekunst’s job as our GM, but far and away my least favorite move of his was snubbing Creed Humphrey (who leads all centers in pass block win rate) for Myers. Hopefully his play improves in the coming years.
Leatherhead
December 13, 2022 at 12:13 pm
I, too, think Nijman at LT is a better than average situation. Runyan has started quite a few games at LG in games where we scored quite a few points.
I think Myers and Newman both came back last year from serious injuries, and I've heard many players say it really takes until the next season before you're 100% back. I'd expect both of these guys to be better next year.
Yes, Creed Humphrey was my choice there, too, but obviously there was something that made the scouting/coaching/personnel people think that Myers was a better choice. I think he played 5 games before he got hurt, and I'd like to give him a chance to make the team again. There are other, weaker, links on the offensive line that I'd rather push out.
Turophile
December 13, 2022 at 08:11 am
I very seldom criticise you TGR, because you are usually right on-point, but I do think the O line is better than you give them credit for. They still feel like a top ten unit to me, even though they have been playing poorly recently.
I'll give you that Newman isn't much, and that the Packers will be worse off without Bakhtiari, because he was the best pass protector in the league pre-injury. Even Sean Rhyan might not turn out well.
However, I think Nijman, Jenkins, Myers, Runyan, Tom (especially when he has had a chance to beef up a bit) will be a good unit.
Leatherhead
December 13, 2022 at 12:07 pm
TGR, I admire your ability to analyze the individual parts of things, but in this case, I think it's more about the forest than the trees. As a group, these are all guys (except Tom), who've been around a little while, they've started a bunch of games, and they're proven NFL linemen .
Nijman is a good LT. He makes the QB better.
Runyan is a good LG, and has been for years.
Jenkins at C, makes both guards better, and makes the QB better.
That's the left side of the line, and it's a pretty good group of battle tested vets. On the right side, we could play Tom or we could draft a starting RT. I'd do both. RG is the least important position on the line, and usually is the weakest starter. We have a group of Myers, Newman, Hanson, and Rhyan competing for that spot, the rest are backups unless somebody better pushes them off the roster.
Without injuries, I'd take this starting 5. This is a good enough group to get the job done, IMO. I also think it's reasonable to assume that at least one, and maybe two, of the guys who didn't play last year....Walker, Jones, Rhyan....might be improved by next year.
After a shaky start, this line is playing pretty well now. Rodgers has time to throw to the WRs, the RBs have holes to run through. I think next year's line could be even better
BirdDogUni
December 12, 2022 at 06:26 pm
The appendectomy was poor timing for sure, but he should be healthy enough to go the last two weeks of the season. Bakh has played well, there is no reason we can't trade him to one of the many teams without a LT. No reason whatsoever.
We'd be stupid not to.
PackyCheese500
December 12, 2022 at 07:00 pm
We'd have to do it for 2024 draft capital after June 1st, though, because we will desperately need the cap relief that comes next year from trading/cutting him
Thegreatreynoldo
December 13, 2022 at 03:19 am
I agree, at least I do if Bakh plays the last two games without incident. I see no reason he would not be worth a day two pick. There might be one: we fans are not privy to his medical records. Heck, we know he had an ACL, but I don't even really know what the other knee issues were.
To trade him, he has to be on the team after March 15 and thus GB can't use the $6M in cap savings to get under the cap.
PackyCheese500
December 13, 2022 at 07:33 am
For Bakh, I would trade or cut him post June first to get 17m of cap relief post June first. That can go toward paying the rookies and depth players
TarynsEyes
December 12, 2022 at 06:30 pm
“The Packers are already all in.”
Chances like this, after one has gone 'all in' are rare, but the Packers have a chance to undo some, of the all in, and get some return from the foolish investment they have made. Although unwilling to admit it openly, I would think they're seriously thinking how to get half-out, at least.
PackyCheese500
December 12, 2022 at 07:02 pm
The Packers are crazy if they go all-in next year with this currently 5-8 roster. We are too shorthanded cap-wise and personnel-wise to compete for a Super Bowl next year regardless of who our QB is. We'd best use 2023 as a year to purge ourselves of the large cap hits from 2021 and 2022, so we can return to a win-now mindset in 2024 with a fresh salary cap.
Leatherhead
December 12, 2022 at 08:30 pm
All in? IMO, going all in next year would be starting Jordan Love at QB and Dillon at RB, with the best possible blockers in front of them, and Lazard-Watson, Doubs shouldering the load at WR.
You trade down a little (we'll probably be picking about 14) and get 5 picks in the Top 100, including a starting caliber TE, a starting caliber OL, a RB to pair with Dillon, and a defensive stud at any position.
That's going all in. Hanging onto Rodgers, Bakhtiari, Jones.....why? How is that going all in?
I'll put this question to you: In the days after the 2007 season, there was a "groundswell" (McGinn's word, and perfect) of support for the idea that we move on from Favre and play Rodgers. Do you think there'll be a groundswell of support to move Rodgers and play Love?
I do. i think it's hard for a reasonable person to think that Rodgers is taking us to the super Bowl this year, next year, or the year after that. IMO, that means that if you're going all in, you aren't planning on doing it with Rodgers. Love can play. We can put a good team on the field.
Turophile
December 13, 2022 at 02:48 am
I think you have a strange idea of all-in. Keeping Rodgers, Bakhtiari and Jones IS going all-in, but like you I'm not for keeping them, for financial reasons (in the case of Bakh and Jones) and for the future (ie with Love as the starter, so we can give him a good run for maybe a season, to see if he really is the answer).
Like Leatherhead, I'd move forward with Love (if the Packers can find a way to do that - and arranging for Rodgers to retire or move elsewhere will be very difficult to do), but I'd call doing what Leatherhead wants a rebuild, not going all-in.
The comment by Mark Oldacres that the financial gain for releasing/trading Bakhtiari 'would be nice', really undersells the importance of getting to grips with the cap. It's importance is huge. They have, in effect, built up a huge debt on their credit card and now they have to find a way to pay it back...............and this involves some nasty choices.
Duneslick
December 13, 2022 at 10:02 am
All in failed. Dont make that worse by continuing Start the recovery
PackyCheese500
December 12, 2022 at 06:58 pm
They have only stuck by Bakh because they have had no choice because of his contract and at the time, they didn't have any replacements. Now that Zach Tom has been drafted. I believe and support that the Packers should cut Bakhtiari. It is nothing personal, but rather financial; the Packers will desperately need the cap relief next year (they can get 17m of relief if they cut him post June-1st), and that will give Tom a good chance to develop.
I also don't think retaining a future-33 year old LT with an extensive injury history is the best idea for the future of this orgainzation, whether our QB of the future is Jordan Love or Aaron Rodgers. Bakh may only play 2/3 of the games in future seasons (however many more he will play) if he is kept.
I will be frank; with all of his injuries, I would not be surprised if he retires next year.
canadapacker
December 12, 2022 at 07:37 pm
I thought and posted that he is done. But then he started to play well before his appendix issues. My issue is the costs ( and this will depend on a renegotiation) will not be much and there will not be a team that will give anything other than maybe a 5th or 6th rounder for a player who needs to spend time on the sidelines during practices. So everything will depend upon the renegotiations. Because they cant afford not to and they cant afford the dead cap
Coldworld
December 13, 2022 at 07:05 am
Bakh’s issue isn’t that he can no longer play very well. He’s shown that he can for now. The issue is how regularly can he play and the increased risk of further injury/decline. At his current cost there is no earthly reason to retain that contract. It’s one we gambled on (reasonably) and lost on.
Even without our now dire cap, Bakh’s is the type of contract that you get out from under. In the cap era, teams have to be very wary of big contracts and scrutinize them in the context of expected future value, replacement equivalency and value for that cap dollar in terms if the overall roster.
There is no rational basis for even considering bringing Bakh back next year. We aren’t in the mix to contend for a Super Bowl with this roster even if Rodgers starts. If Love starts, Tom or Nijman have demonstrated that they can handle LT just fine. While Tom may need more confirmation, Nijman has done so enough that switching him back wouldn’t be an issue.
The type of thinking is this piece is the type that kills franchises. It makes for Swiss cheese rosters and disappointment even without the incredible baggage we have already loaded ourselves down with.
I disagree with many who think Bakh needs to play to ensure trade value. He doesn’t. His underlying issues are not going to go away: there will always be availability issues with him. 4 , let alone 2 games won’t change that and the appendectomy is irrelevant. He’s shown he can play. He’s shown he can’t necessarily do so every week. That’s who he is and speaks to value. The only way that changes is if he goes out and gets hurt.
ricky
December 12, 2022 at 07:29 pm
Bakhtiari is still an excellent left tackle. When healthy. The Packers will be able to make sure they don't overuse or misuse Bakhtiari, because they did such an excellent job of replacing him and Jenkins the first few weeks of the season. Bakhtiari is going to be 32 in September. And he has now entered the same territory that Bryan Bulaga occupied on the right side for so long: excellent, when healthy. The Packers need salary cap is dire. And if we are going to learn anything from the Rodgers situation, it's that you part ways with a player a year too early, rather than a year too late. Football is a game of replacement (sometimes clichés are true), and quite simply, I'm not sure that I fully trust the coaching staff, especially the DC and the OL coach. Time to move on.
PackyCheese500
December 13, 2022 at 07:30 am
In my opinion, Steno should be demoted to OL coach once again. The early results haven’t been promising, and the OL misses him.
Turophile
December 13, 2022 at 07:34 am
If Steno could swallow that, I'd be all for it..............but who willingly accepts a demotion.
PackyCheese500
December 13, 2022 at 09:02 am
Better than losing your job altogether, right?
PhantomII
December 12, 2022 at 07:34 pm
I'm good with a (HEALTHY) Z. Tom and Nijman. Cap relief...We need a couple very good Safeties, a very good TE and a Stud DL monster..K. Clark is not doing it...
stockholder
December 12, 2022 at 07:51 pm
Desperate Times call for desperate measures. Bahk is done as a packer. No one will pay his market value. And we shouldn't either.
BirdDogUni
December 12, 2022 at 10:17 pm
How can a man be so wrong, so often?
Are you trying to be wrong?
Lol
Thegreatreynoldo
December 13, 2022 at 03:22 am
Market value is what someone will pay you. If no one will pay "market value" then by definition that isn't one's market value.
Coldworld
December 13, 2022 at 07:17 am
Market value is, anyway, the wrong lens, in isolation at least. The first inquiry is are we better off without that cap hit in terms if the overall picture. That takes into account our competitive position, our cap and our options at that position. In this case, the decision is that the options, cap and Team circumstances are clearly in favor of obtaining relief for 2023 and beyond. Anything we might get from a trade is a bonus. Bakh is a guy we need to accept needs to be released if a trade can’t be arranged. That should be the starting realization.
dobber
December 15, 2022 at 08:44 am
I seem to remember when I went through my old baseball cards I found two Rickey Henderson rookie cards. I looked up the value and told my dad what they were worth. He just shrugged and said, "it's only worth that if you can get someone to pay it."
True enough.
PackyCheese500
December 13, 2022 at 07:31 am
Well, Stock, we finally agree on something!
Packers0808
December 12, 2022 at 08:03 pm
Have to be crazy to let Bak, he will come back stronger next year now that the knee is starting to show strength and the last 3 games he played he was his old self. He will be back and be a starter then all of you wanting him gone will be praising his play!
BirdDogUni
December 12, 2022 at 08:28 pm
If he isn't restructured or traded, I'll eat my hat.
Packers0808
December 12, 2022 at 08:35 pm
Maybe restructured or hope your hat is chocolate!
BirdDogUni
December 12, 2022 at 09:52 pm
Lol... The reason I know it will be restructure or trade is because there's no way we can afford not to.
I did like the chocolate hat idea though.
splitpea1
December 12, 2022 at 08:30 pm
If his replacement(s) play reasonably well in the final games against better competition than the Bears can offer, then it may be feasible to move on and get that cap relief. If we can get away with developing Tom and Nijman or finding a cheaper (but competent) alternative, then I'm all for it.
Although I suppose it's possible, it wouldn't count on any player being "amiable to some new language."
"What if Bakhtiari goes on to play at a high level for several more seasons in another uniform?" Well, good for him--we should all root for him to succeed wherever he plays! The fear of hindsight....is never useful.
PackyCheese500
December 13, 2022 at 07:32 am
Even if he does play at a high level elsewhere, he realistically won’t play more than 2/3 of the games in a season, probably.
mbpacker
December 12, 2022 at 08:48 pm
I can think of one team that has the $ to sign Bakh and would be just like them to do so and watch he balls out for them and who needs an OT. Who? The Bears! Doesn't that just warm your cockles?
BirdDogUni
December 12, 2022 at 09:53 pm
Not even Gutey would trade him to duh bares...
Coldworld
December 13, 2022 at 07:26 am
If, hypothetically, the Bears had signed him instead of us when he got his new contract, we’d probably be laughing. Paying big bucks to older elite players with health issues is a losing gambit. We heard the same when Bulaga was allowed to leave, when prior OL stalwarts did. Name one that proved a great. Linsley was a pure cap choice—he was younger and healthy when he left (31 now, the same age as Bakh). Other than that we’ve been the winners by knowing when to move on.
Guam
December 13, 2022 at 08:47 am
I've posted this before, but it bears repeating. Over the past 22 years the Packers have a lengthy history of not signing offensive linemen to third contracts. Only Tauscher, Clifton and Bahk have gotten third contracts and Tauscher was a one year deal. All others have been cut or traded.
Why? Only one (Wahle) of the many O-linemen cut or traded actually completed their third contract with the team that signed them. Everyone else was cut before the end of their third contract - mostly due to injury and/or under performance. For the three the Packers signed to third contracts - Clifton did not complete his third contract due to injury, Tauscher signed a fourth (one year contract) and Bahk didn't play for nearly two years due to injury although he is still with the team.
Bottom line: Offensive linemen on third contracts carry substantial injury risk and are often not available to the team that signed them. Bahk will be 32 next year and nearing the end of his third contract. What are the chances he will play 17 games?
MooPack
December 12, 2022 at 10:30 pm
"Despite returning to All-Pro form after recovering from a devastating string of knee problems"
That premise is wrong. All-Pro? Good, but no. This team needs to get younger with longer term, healthier, and maybe better talent at this point, given the chance. The time for "all in" has passed. I understand the pain of change and devotion to great Vets, but they can't go on like this.
BAMABADGER
December 13, 2022 at 07:56 am
"Despite returning to All-Pro form after recovering from a devastating string of knee problems...."
Bak has played better, but saying he has returned to All-Pro form is a stretch. His salary is to high a risk given his knee issue. Trade him at year end. A team that is close to getting to the playoffs should be willing to roll the dice on an older injured left tackle.
Philarod
December 13, 2022 at 08:49 am
Restructure Bakh's contract or his knee?
Extend...hyperextend which?
Sorry...
PackyCheese500
December 13, 2022 at 11:16 am
LOL...made me chuckle
Philarod
December 13, 2022 at 08:43 pm
Thanks....just so he's not "out with a hyperextended contract".
Irish_Cheesehead
December 14, 2022 at 02:49 pm
"It’s therefore difficult to see the sense in releasing Bakhtiari, a move that would likely not go down well with Aaron Rodgers."
I wonder how moving on from Rodgers will go down with Bakhtiari.