A-Rod's New team (if traded), what can Packers get in trade?

[Joe]

23 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

Sometimes things just run their course.  1. The Packers are 0-4 in championship games in the past seven years and can't get over the hump.  They've got cap woes and the QB keeps making more money.  2. Maybe it's time to try the Qb on a rookie contract route and beef up the team around him.  I'm fine either way, probably not winning another title with Rodgers anyway.

1. In each of those games, there has been a significant defensive flaw that the other team exposed; last year it was Kevin King and a DC that called a horrible defensive scheme.

2. That's almost literally why Jordan Love was drafted TBH. The staff clearly thought that Rodgers could give them two more OK years while Love developed behind him(fixing mechanical issues mainly) and then Rodgers would either be traded or cut(most likely traded of course). Personally, I think the media is now trying to force the issue whereas Rodgers wants to stay in Green Bay, but have more control of his destiny and obviously more of a say in regards to personnel.

[craig]

2 hours ago, 15412 said:

... Still unknown if he's asking for more insight in regards to draft picks and FA.   Insight in a small way may be one thing, you never give any player front office direction.....

Heh heh, I haven't been on this board that long, but my recall is board typically mocked anybody who liked Kumerow, and dismissed people who wanted WR high as Madden-lovers.  

[DWhitehurst]

Fwiw, I like the relatively more conservative approach of the Packers FO in terms of the draft/free agency/cap discipline.  Is it as conservative as it was under Ted Thompson? No. Gutekunst is a bit more flexible but not over the top. Overall, while there is no perfect outcome, I do see a good balance between trying to address both the short-term and the long-term. I mean, last draft was weighed more long-term. This draft was weighed more short-term. Media Pundits like Colin Cowherd can mock it all he wants (calling Green Bay the other day too conservative, like the stuffy English Royal Family), but when you look at the Green Bay org as a business, an entertainment business, this more conservative, less absolute short-term all-in approach is what helps to keep the customers (fans) attention. Yes, your margin for error is smaller (e.g., a key injury to a cog player affecting their chances, e.g., Bak going down), but this approach at least puts you in contention in more seasons than not. I mean, yes, we've fallen short, but looking over a period of 10 years, being in 4 NFC Championships and just making the playoffs almost every year is what keeps my interest and investment in the team as a fan. Keeping the customer's interest, getting them to keep buying your product, is what a stable, successful business does. Is it sexy? Nope. Is it relatively stable, reliable? More often than not. Aaron Rodgers may not like it, hardly any teenagers who don't fully comprehend yet through enough life experience that life is not perfect and is full choices that each have consequences none of which are perfect, but as an older, wiser fan I do.

Edited May 7, 2021 by DWhitehurst

[CriminalMind]

5 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

There's not going to be any offers or trades this year ... he's already laying the ground work for a GB return.

Certainly possible he is working on a extension/restructure, possibly with either/both an opt-out or a NTC.

[mikemike778]

2 hours ago, Joe said:

1. In each of those games, there has been a significant defensive flaw that the other team exposed; last year it was Kevin King and a DC that called a horrible defensive scheme.

2. That's almost literally why Jordan Love was drafted TBH. The staff clearly thought that Rodgers could give them two more OK years while Love developed behind him(fixing mechanical issues mainly) and then Rodgers would either be traded or cut(most likely traded of course). Personally, I think the media is now trying to force the issue whereas Rodgers wants to stay in Green Bay, but have more control of his destiny and obviously more of a say in regards to personnel.

The problem with that (2) is that you only get four years of a cheap rookie contract. If you spend the first two sitting behind Rodgers and then trade Rodgers in the third year the dead money on Rodgers wipes out another year of the 'Rookie QB contract benefits' so you only get one year benefit of a cheap starting QB.

If you want to go down the rookie contract route then your rookie needs to either start in year one or year two (with no dead money against the previous QB) at the latest.

 

[mikemike778]

3 hours ago, PACKRULE said:

I think most of the board is level headed on Gute's moves for the most part. Some may want more money kicked down the road to splurge now. Some are on the more conservative side. I mean I like both ways, but both have consequences. I mean look at Denver since Manning left they have been a mess and they kicked the can down the road and went all in. Tampa the jury is still out. When TB walks away eventually how will they fair as they have gone all in. 

GB stays conservative each year not kicking the can to far down the road but it sometimes is missing that one little piece to get them over the hump. As a fan that hurts too as you know that one play here and there can be the difference. 

That is why FO guys have heart issues and also get paid way more then us:) 

Until this year ?

Its actually kind of ironic that its the first year that Packers really and truly have kicked huge amounts of cap into the future to try and win this year -  and its this year Rodgers has gone into a sulk.

If anything for Rodgers reputation, his best bet would be to play 21 and leave in 22 when we pay the bill.

We should have a real chance this year but there's a good chance the team gets ripped up next year. Would look good on his resume if we won it in his last year and then the team dropped to 4-13 or something when he leaves (still seems strange 17 games).  

 

[Joe]

20 minutes ago, mikemike778 said:

If you want to go down the rookie contract route then your rookie needs to either start in year one or year two (with no dead money against the previous QB) at the latest.

Which is yet another reason why I absolutely hated the Love pick.

[OneTwoSixFive]

8 minutes ago, Joe said:

Which is yet another reason why I absolutely hated the Love pick.

That future is still unwritten, might turn out an inspired pick, might not.

[PACKRULE]

22 minutes ago, mikemike778 said:

Until this year ?

Its actually kind of ironic that its the first year that Packers really and truly have kicked huge amounts of cap into the future to try and win this year -  and its this year Rodgers has gone into a sulk.

If anything for Rodgers reputation, his best bet would be to play 21 and leave in 22 when we pay the bill.

We should have a real chance this year but there's a good chance the team gets ripped up next year. Would look good on his resume if we won it in his last year and then the team dropped to 4-13 or something when he leaves (still seems strange 17 games).  

 

Good point but I think that had more to do with the cap than what we would usually do. If we didn't put some money into future years we would have had to release some great players. I think this was necessary rather than for AR and a SB bid. Prudent.

[PACKRULE]

13 minutes ago, Joe said:

Which is yet another reason why I absolutely hated the Love pick.

Timing was not perfect but a top QB prospect fell.......when is the right time. Gute and Ball are sitting around saying ok this is the draft yep this year, we have all the math figured out. And oh dam we're at pick 28 or 30 and dam no QB is falling. You take the pick when it is there when you're in that position and you play / hedge either side if AR plays great until 42 big deal you took a kid in the first and you trade him or you decide screw it and dump the old dog and do the rookie game.

At the end of the day it's a dam game and all this drama is the entertainment part. But why hate on the pick, took balls on Gutes part. And sure it may not pan out, but dam if it does.

I only responded to your post on this as you've knocked this pick quite a bit. At this point i'll chose to look at the glass as half full. I"ll be happy that Gute learned from TT who was good and really happy we aren't the Bengals or Jets or Dolphins when it comes to drafting and team management. 

In Gute we should trust. 

[PACKRULE]

3 hours ago, Joe said:

1. In each of those games, there has been a significant defensive flaw that the other team exposed; last year it was Kevin King and a DC that called a horrible defensive scheme.

2. That's almost literally why Jordan Love was drafted TBH. The staff clearly thought that Rodgers could give them two more OK years while Love developed behind him(fixing mechanical issues mainly) and then Rodgers would either be traded or cut(most likely traded of course). Personally, I think the media is now trying to force the issue whereas Rodgers wants to stay in Green Bay, but have more control of his destiny and obviously more of a say in regards to personnel.

Don't forget our offensive showing in the first half was just that offensive:) 

Edited May 7, 2021 by PACKRULE

[Joe]

23 minutes ago, PACKRULE said:

Timing was not perfect but a top QB prospect fell.......when is the right time. Gute and Ball are sitting around saying ok this is the draft yep this year, we have all the math figured out. And oh dam we're at pick 28 or 30 and dam no QB is falling. You take the pick when it is there when you're in that position and you play / hedge either side if AR plays great until 42 big deal you took a kid in the first and you trade him or you decide screw it and dump the old dog and do the rookie game.

At the end of the day it's a dam game and all this drama is the entertainment part. But why hate on the pick, took balls on Gutes part. And sure it may not pan out, but dam if it does.

I only responded to your post on this as you've knocked this pick quite a bit. At this point i'll chose to look at the glass as half full. I"ll be happy that Gute learned from TT who was good and really happy we aren't the Bengals or Jets or Dolphins when it comes to drafting and team management. 

In Gute we should trust. 

He shot up the board very late in the process and was viewed as a late Day 2/Early Day 3 pick. Again, they made the pick thinking Rodgers would fall off a cliff, get injured again, and/or his numbers would continue to decline.

I get the logic, yes; but we could've done better drafting a year later when we could've gotten a Davis Mills Day 2. 

 

On the other hand, given that Rodgers didn't receive so much as a phone call in relation to the pick it tells us that Gutey wanted to move off of him ASAP.

[VonKarman]

Davis Mills in the second round a better option? Please.

[PACKRULE]

9 minutes ago, Joe said:

He shot up the board very late in the process and was viewed as a late Day 2/Early Day 3 pick. Again, they made the pick thinking Rodgers would fall off a cliff, get injured again, and/or his numbers would continue to decline.

I get the logic, yes; but we could've done better drafting a year later when we could've gotten a Davis Mills Day 2. 

 

On the other hand, given that Rodgers didn't receive so much as a phone call in relation to the pick it tells us that Gutey wanted to move off of him ASAP.

I see you put lots of time into checking out picks and college tape and such.

With that said though your last post is full of assumptions with absolutely no foundation. You can assume gute and MLF were trying to run AR out of town or doing what hey should and hedging their bets maybe regarding AR's age recent history of play and a top QB prospect falling. A quick tweak to perception and the pick looks so different. 

Day 3 not sure that's the case but again it's your post. 

 

With that said you believe in Davis Mills and Gute believed in Love. I get your side is what it is I won't hate on the pick at all. It's done wonders for far to be honest. 

[beekay414]

23 minutes ago, Joe said:

we could've done better drafting a year later when we could've gotten a Davis Mills Day 2.