Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, DWhitehurst said:

I hope I'm wrong, but I seriously don't think they'd get so much in a trade for Rodgers as some here are predicting, especially now that it is post-draft. Again, I hope I eat crow if they trade him. But none of us here wants to see Gutekunst fire-sale Rodgers and get peanuts in return. In that case I'd guess most of us here would rather just make Rodgers retire. So, let's put the question this way:

As a fan, what is the BARE MINIMUM you could accept in return for Rodgers should Gutekunst trade him???

For me personally, I'd say my bare minimum would be two 1sts  + a 2nd + a player of the Packer's choosing. Otherwise, let him retire. 

Similar to this - although the player would have to be a first or second year guy the Pack really want. This would be absolutely the bare minimum. 

Any team trading for Rodgers will think they can win a title so you have to budget for the picks being 32 in your valuations. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nick_gb said:

The fact that you think that was in regards to non players being traded just proves my point. Thanks 

You're quite the wunderkind yourself...Suggesting a person becomes a fan upon exiting the birth canal....Translation: I'm older than forty dolt!...

Enough, it's not my job to educate other people's children....

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 40Year Pack Fan said:

You're quite the wunderkind yourself...Suggesting a person becomes a fan upon exiting the birth canal....Translation: I'm older than forty dolt!...

Enough, it's not my job to educate other people's children....

Older than 40 and you still don't get it? It may not be your job to educate other people's "children" but it should be your job to educate yourself. Please work on that, thank you! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, 40Year Pack Fan said:

How about Gute for Julio Jones?....

I understand your comment was made with humor in mind, but I can also understand why it could trigger some. Gutes has done an amazing job since taking over, yet some are buying into this narrative that he has wronged Rodgers in some way by not telling him he might draft a QB. Yet anyone who listened to Gutes knew drafting a QB in 2019 and again in 2020 were possibilities, if us as fans knew from listening to Gutes, than surely Dunn and Rodgers should have known. If not it is shame on them, not Gutes.  So when you throw out trading one of the most important people to the Packers success the past two seasons for a overpriced, in decline WR I guess you shouldn't be surprised if some pushback might come your way. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Nick_gb said:

Older than 40 and you still don't get it? It may not be your job to educate other people's "children" but it should be your job to educate yourself. Please work on that, thank you! 

Right back at ya ace....Your age being one third the number in my username and your I.Q. lacking the zero on the end....It's apparent, you not only cannot comprehend time continuum but are incapable of civility....Isn't it your kid brother's turn to sit on your lap and play on the computer?....

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, R T said:

I understand your comment was made with humor in mind, but I can also understand why it could trigger some. Gutes has done an amazing job since taking over, yet some are buying into this narrative that he has wronged Rodgers in some way by not telling him he might draft a QB. Yet anyone who listened to Gutes knew drafting a QB in 2019 and again in 2020 were possibilities, if us as fans knew from listening to Gutes, than surely Dunn and Rodgers should have known. If not it is shame on them, not Gutes.  So when you throw out trading one of the most important people to the Packers success the past two seasons for a overpriced, in decline WR I guess you shouldn't be surprised if some pushback might come your way. 

Page 286 Report: Rodgers wants out of GB thread, I wrote: "Maybe it's no beef at all with FO personal....I think Rodgers figures his time in GB has run it's course....Every thing he wanted last season came to fruition and still no championship....San Francisco is a certainty to compete after last year's run of injuries....The Rams could be much improved with Stafford and TB is sure to be even better....Washington can be scary if they can field a competitive offense....Even if Rodgers continues his MVP level of play, will it be enough?....GB could find themselves out of the SB championship discussion this season"...

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, badgers0821 said:

"Just for fun" clearly has no meaning to you. Enjoy that 9-5.

Not sure what 'enjoy that 9-5' is suppose to mean, if I had a 9-5 job am I suppose to hate it? I have been retired for 8 years now, but if I still had a 9-5 I certainly would enjoy it. Not sure why anyone would stay in a job they didn't enjoy. Seems like a strange comment. 

My comment about Lazard being just thrown into the trade as a someone of little value in your eyes, was simply to point out that MLF probably has a much higher value on Lazard than you and some other fans seem to have. In MLF offense the blocking ability of a WR is a very important quality, maybe the most important quality to MLF.  

Lazard has graded out as the top run-blocking receiver in the NFL among 108 qualifying players at the position since 2019. 

Add in that Lazard is on a 850K contract this coming season and it should be very clear to everyone why he wouldn't and shouldn't be just a throw in on any trade. No one is going to get MLF to comment on it, but it is very likely that MLF would rather have Lazard in his offense than Jerry Jeudy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, 40Year Pack Fan said:

Page 286 Report: Rodgers wants out of GB thread, I wrote: "Maybe it's no beef at all with FO personal....I think Rodgers figures his time in GB has run it's course....Every thing he wanted last season came to fruition and still no championship....San Francisco is a certainty to compete after last year's run of injuries....The Rams could be much improved with Stafford and TB is sure to be even better....Washington can be scary if they can field a competitive offense....Even if Rodgers continues his MVP level of play, will it be enough?....GB could find themselves out of the SB championship discussion this season"...

So what does that have to do with you suggesting dumping Gutes?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 40Year Pack Fan said:

Page 286 Report: Rodgers wants out of GB thread, I wrote: "Maybe it's no beef at all with FO personal....I think Rodgers figures his time in GB has run it's course....Every thing he wanted last season came to fruition and still no championship....San Francisco is a certainty to compete after last year's run of injuries....The Rams could be much improved with Stafford and TB is sure to be even better....Washington can be scary if they can field a competitive offense....Even if Rodgers continues his MVP level of play, will it be enough?....GB could find themselves out of the SB championship discussion this season"...

His mentioning of philosophy and talking about the people being part of the organization was a shot at the management.  If he plans on returning, his comments will cause some awkwardness at best.  Tough to win a SB with that hanging over an organization.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NFLGURU said:

His mentioning of philosophy and talking about the people being part of the organization was a shot at the management.  If he plans on returning, his comments will cause some awkwardness at best.  Tough to win a SB with that hanging over an organization.

And you know this how?...AFAIA Rodgers has only stated he wanted out of GB...He may also be upset with management because they won't acquiesce his demands for a trade...

BTW..Can we trust what Rodgers says?...He has openly stated he wasn't happy about the choice to draft Love, but also comes out and says he likes (loves) him... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 40Year Pack Fan said:

Now I have Nick's little brother asking questions...Do you not understand the term tongue in cheek?...

My first comment to you in replying was 'I understand your comment was made with humor in mind', so how is that not understanding a tongue in cheek comment. 

I think you are being a little overly sensitive here with my response, I was just pointing out why some may not find humor in it. I am not attacking you here, if that is your thinking.     

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, R T said:

My first comment to you in replying was 'I understand your comment was made with humor in mind', so how is that not understanding a tongue in cheek comment. 

I think you are being a little overly sensitive here with my response, I was just pointing out why some may not find humor in it. I am not attacking you here, if that is your thinking.     

You posted "I understand your comment was made with humor in mind, but I can also understand why it could trigger some" ...Some what?...Negative response from somebody who may be sensitive about what I posted?....And I'm being the sensitive one?....

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 40Year Pack Fan said:

You posted "I understand your comment was made with humor in mind, but I can also understand why it could trigger some" ...Some what?...Negative response from somebody who may be sensitive about what I posted?....And I'm being the sensitive one?....

I didn't piss in your Wheaties this morning, it wasn't me. I commented as a third party just to point out to you that some may be triggered by it. I don't care, if you want to make a stupid comment have at it, people do it all the time on every forum out there. 

I just told you I wasn't attacking you here, don't know how to be any clearer than that.    

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...