Packerraymond Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 5 hours ago, CWood21 said: We're talking about the former #1 overall pick and one of the best players to come out in recent years PLUS what's a guaranteed top-5 pick. I'm not sure there's any team that could even offer that. For 5-7 years of top 2 in NFL history QB? Be a fool to pass that up. I don't think it's enough personally. Browns don't have a roster for it though, need a team that's just a QB away, Rodgers has limited time, needs to be added and instantly a SB contender. Im assuming an offseason trade here. Jacksonville, Cincy, NYG, ARI, Denver, LAC, Was and NO (assuming their QBs leave/retire), would be my fits. Obviously wouldn't get the #1 pick, but these would be the best teams to offer a multitude of picks/players. That said, no Im not taking that deal. There is more at stake than simple player transaction here. You trade a face of franchise that has done everything asked and more, no agent is going to look fondly upon your organization or advise clients to sign here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopackgonerd Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 5 hours ago, incognito_man said: the miss part of your equation is the delta from Rodgers to his replacement. It's also the most key part. Still doesn't hold any ground for me tbh. You gotta bank on these picks working out, and the players coming in having a drastic impact that leaps this defense to top 5+. On paper it might look good, but the shift of the team will be devastating, you're almost rebuilding in a way. But I could be wrong and it could be like the Dak coming in for Romo type of thing, but thats rare af. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollino14 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 16 hours ago, CWood21 said: Insane would be an understatement. Secondly, I think even if you offered Rodgers to the Browns for Garrett+, they'd still turn it down. First off, no offence Horizon but this discussion shouldn't be taking place. It's absurd to even think about trading Aaron Rodgers. Second off, Cleveland would jump on this deal in a second. Wouldn't even be a discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 We need to be able to spread out the money we give to people. So, maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jontat83 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 No I wouldn't trade him, not when there is no clear signs of drop off, he isn't injury prone and he has far less tread on his tyres that a lot of players with his length of career because he sat for so long. There is no guarantee if you offload him for picks and then focus on a rebuild via the draft you are going to hit on them. If Rodgers became available most of the teams in the league would be interested, even NE. I'm sure non Packers fans but are huge fans of Rodgers would perhaps would want him to move on because you would want a player of that caliber arguably the greatest talent ever at the position to win another trophy and I think chances are good he would elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted October 20, 2017 Author Share Posted October 20, 2017 11 hours ago, Gopackgonerd said: Those are horrible examples lol. It's subtraction by addition if you think Joey bosa and or jalen ramsey plus 2 first round picks will help this team more than rodgers. What are ya smoking my dude. They're not horrible examples, and everybody here has said countless times, "We're wasting Aaron's career," by not having a better roster. We can't get a better roster with Aaron on the roster. We could do what the Patriots did and sign everybody, all the free agents, to get a #1 defense. It worked for them, but now their defense is bad. What if the Patriots did that and the Falcons ran the ball more than 4 times after being up 28-3? It's not about helping this team more NEXT YEAR, it's about putting this team in a better situation for the NEXT FIVE YEARS. Aaron Rodgers will not win another Super Bowl without a top 10 defense. McCarthy and him are not good enough in the playoffs to do that. Evidence? 7/16 times they've scored below the NFL average in points per game in the playoffs. It would be a different story if Aaron was averaging 35 points a game in the playoffs and he scored below the average 3 or 4 times, but he hasn't. It's the same exact thing with Tom Brady, which is why the Patriots won't be winning a Super Bowl this year unless that defense suddenly creates a top pass rusher and an above average front seven out of a bad front seven. Brady has scored 24 points or less in 17/34 games. Why has he been to 7 Super Bowls? Why has he won 5? Because he is 10-4 in those 14 games. Because his defense played better than his offense. After the 2018 season, the Packers won't be able to afford to sign free agent defenders, and we won't be in a position to draft top defensive rookies. Unless we get a Hall of Fame defensive player in this coming draft, we're going to be in for 5 more players on the level of Clinton-Dix, Randall, Clark, Perry... until Rodgers retires, and our continued lack of blue chip, all-pro potential defensive players will keep our defense at the 16-30 range of defenses. I'd rather win a Super Bowl or two in the next 8 years while Rodgers wins 2-3 on a different team than win no Super Bowls for the next six years with Rodgers, and sending Rodgers to "Only one Super Bowl" land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 4 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said: They're not horrible examples, and everybody here has said countless times, "We're wasting Aaron's career," by not having a better roster. We can't get a better roster with Aaron on the roster. Very few people here have said that, and the one's who have said that are fools. Take last year, 4-6, no DBs healthy. Our QB goes on a run where he throws 27 TDs and 2 INTs, you've heard Madden numbers? Im not even sure I could do that on Madden. Under your scenario here, with no Aaron, that team loses some key defenses pieces, it's over. That team might have gone 7-9 in that case. Aaron Rodgers is a great equalizer, sure in a perfect vacuum trading him for a bunch of picks and defensive studs could help the team. However the NFL isn't a perfect vacuum. Having Aaron Rodgers means you have a chance to win the SB regardless of who the other 52 on your roster are. We do not need a top 10 defense to win another SB, we just need Aaron Rodgers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltarich87 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Rodgers goes down and everyone loses their minds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted October 20, 2017 Author Share Posted October 20, 2017 Just now, Packerraymond said: Last year, Aaron overcomes crap roster. Equalizer. Don't need top 10 defense. I completely and wholly disagree. If one aspect of your team plays poorly in the playoffs, you are not winning the game. Just ONE aspect, and you're not winning or likely even getting to the playoffs. Show me one team in the past 20 years of Super Bowl history that didn't have a good defense (23 points or less average in playoffs) and I'll relent and believe that Rodgers can get it done with an 11-32 ranked defense. You weren't going to do the work there, but I will. And I'll go one further and add a couple teams. Packers - 16 Broncos - 18 Broncos - 10.6 Rams - 19.6 Ravens - 5.75 Patriots - 15.6 Buccaneers - 12.3 Patriots - 19 Patriots - 17 Steelers - 15.5 Colts - 16.25 Giants - 16.25 Steelers - 20.3 Saints - 19.6 Packers - 19 Giants - 14 Ravens - 22 Seahawks - 13.3 Patriots - 20.6 Broncos - 14.6 Patriots - 20.3 Super Bowl winning defenses in the playoffs give up an average of: 16.5 points per playoff game. Our defense since Rodgers has been here has given up an average of: 26.4 points per playoff game. Aaron Rodgers is not 10 points better than the rest of the NFL. He has averaged 28.5 points per game in his playoff career. A two point difference does NOT suggest that Aaron is good enough to constantly overcome the opposition in the playoffs. Adding to this, the only year he DID win a Super Bowl, the Packers offense scored 100 points for an average of 25 a game. The defense allowed 76 points. Aaron Rodgers in the playoffs is not even as good as Drew Brees in the playoffs. Brees has averaged 29 points per game in the playoffs. He's averaged 30 if you count only his Saints playoff games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 If you're talking about trading Rodgers, you better (1) have another future HoF QB ready to take his place or (2) gut the entire organization from TT through MM. Our GM and HC cant win in this league without 12 or his equivalent, I dont care if you get 5 1st round picks from Cleveland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted October 20, 2017 Author Share Posted October 20, 2017 Just now, deltarich87 said: Rodgers goes down and everyone loses their minds If my argument is so senseless, you can disprove it with facts, points and counterpoints instead of gifs from movies that are ten years old in July. I've provided historical points, trends and facts of the NFL for the past 20+ years, including historical #1 defense versus #1 offense Super Bowls, average points of Super Bowl winners and so on. Everybody else has provided, "Rodgers is good, the Joker meme." I've yet to see one fact-based argument for why it makes more sense to keep Rodgers than trade him. If it was such a simple fact, people would be able to find more examples of great quarterbacks overcoming below average defenses to win the Super Bowl. That's never happened. Tom Brady has won 4 games when the opposing offense scores more than 23 points. He has lost the other 6. No quarterback can overcome below average defenses in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 10 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said: I completely and wholly disagree. If one aspect of your team plays poorly in the playoffs, you are not winning the game. Just ONE aspect, and you're not winning or likely even getting to the playoffs. Show me one team in the past 20 years of Super Bowl history that didn't have a good defense (23 points or less average in playoffs) and I'll relent and believe that Rodgers can get it done with an 11-32 ranked defense. You weren't going to do the work there, but I will. And I'll go one further and add a couple teams. Packers - 16 Broncos - 18 Broncos - 10.6 Rams - 19.6 Ravens - 5.75 Patriots - 15.6 Buccaneers - 12.3 Patriots - 19 Patriots - 17 Steelers - 15.5 Colts - 16.25 Giants - 16.25 Steelers - 20.3 Saints - 19.6 Packers - 19 Giants - 14 Ravens - 22 Seahawks - 13.3 Patriots - 20.6 Broncos - 14.6 Patriots - 20.3 Super Bowl winning defenses in the playoffs give up an average of: 16.5 points per playoff game. Our defense since Rodgers has been here has given up an average of: 26.4 points per playoff game. Aaron Rodgers is not 10 points better than the rest of the NFL. He has averaged 28.5 points per game in his playoff career. A two point difference does NOT suggest that Aaron is good enough to constantly overcome the opposition in the playoffs. Adding to this, the only year he DID win a Super Bowl, the Packers offense scored 100 points for an average of 25 a game. The defense allowed 76 points. Aaron Rodgers in the playoffs is not even as good as Drew Brees in the playoffs. Brees has averaged 29 points per game in the playoffs. He's averaged 30 if you count only his Saints playoff games. 68/13, that's the TD/INT playoff ratio of the last 10 SB winning QBs. Elite QB play wins in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted October 20, 2017 Author Share Posted October 20, 2017 Just now, packfanfb said: If you're talking about trading Rodgers, you better (1) have another future HoF QB ready to take his place or (2) gut the entire organization from TT through MM. Our GM and HC cant win in this league without 12 or his equivalent, I dont care if you get 5 1st round picks from Cleveland. How many people would have said it would be stupid to trade Favre unless you've got a HoF behind him every single year since 1996? If I have a choice between the best QB in NFL history and a bottom half defense --or-- an average QB and a top five defense, I'm taking the top five defense and I'm being on the side of NFL history over the past 23 years, probably the past duration of Super Bowl history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 48 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: Very few people here have said that, and the one's who have said that are fools. Take last year, 4-6, no DBs healthy. Our QB goes on a run where he throws 27 TDs and 2 INTs, you've heard Madden numbers? Im not even sure I could do that on Madden. Under your scenario here, with no Aaron, that team loses some key defenses pieces, it's over. That team might have gone 7-9 in that case. Aaron Rodgers is a great equalizer, sure in a perfect vacuum trading him for a bunch of picks and defensive studs could help the team. However the NFL isn't a perfect vacuum. Having Aaron Rodgers means you have a chance to win the SB regardless of who the other 52 on your roster are. We do not need a top 10 defense to win another SB, we just need Aaron Rodgers. This. If we do what HorizontoZenith suggests what guarantee is there that these defensive players we draft are going to put us in the SB? The draft is the ultimate crap shoot. Rodgers is a known commodity and his presence on your roster automatically makes your team a contender. I can't think of any defensive player playing today this side of the late Reggie White that can do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltarich87 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 What's easier to accomplish...building a good defense or finding a HOF QB? You find the QB and go from there. GB has the QB. You want them to trade him because the FO has missed on their defensive picks? Randall, Rollins, Fackrell, Khryi Thornton, Datone Jones, Jerel Worthy, etc. These were all defensive picks by GB over the yrs taken within the first 3 rds. This is part of the reason why the defense continues to be stagnant as a middling one at best TBH, I honestly think the defensive performance would improve just simply with a switch at DC. Secondary still needs more talent for sure, but I don't think Dom helps that group out or puts them in the best position to succeed either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.