Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, St Vince said:

That's 4 draft picks. I doubt if they would entertain that. I say 4 because Ruggs was a high 1st rounder. We Packers fans are overvaluing Rodgers, he's pushing 38. You give four 1st Rounders for Mahomes not old man Rodgers.

I don't have a hard time envisioning Gruden being willing to throw whatever we want at us to acquire Rodgers. He loves his veteran QBs and this will be the best player he's ever had to work with. Mayock might not love it but it's pretty clear Gruden has the real power there anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, St Vince said:

That's 4 draft picks. I doubt if they would entertain that. I say 4 because Ruggs was a high 1st rounder. We Packers fans are overvaluing Rodgers, he's pushing 38. You give four 1st Rounders for Mahomes not old man Rodgers.

Trading for the MVP would not come cheap.  QBs can play at a high level longer than most positions provided that you give them a line and some weapons and we would be covering his signing bonus.  I still don't believe it will happen but it should be historic trade value if it ever does.

Edited by Refugee
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, St Vince said:

That's 4 draft picks. I doubt if they would entertain that. I say 4 because Ruggs was a high 1st rounder. We Packers fans are overvaluing Rodgers, he's pushing 38. You give four 1st Rounders for Mahomes not old man Rodgers.

I don't think people understand the trade value of QBs right now. If anything, that's undervaluing Rodgers trade value.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 1sts a 2nd and a player think that's just about right.  Packers are probably going to dig in.  Think it's a mistake if you can get a decent return just show him the door and move on.  This convo will really heat up when he doesn't report. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is easier to play QB in the NFL than ever before, that's why they can now play so long and be effective.  Some desperate team (Raiders, Broncs) will be willing to bury themselves in an extension with jolly Rodger giving them a long term with him.  Giving us a booty call of treasure.  Minimum of the value of 2 1's and 2 2's picks and or players.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Rodjahs12 said:

I don't have a hard time envisioning Gruden being willing to throw whatever we want at us to acquire Rodgers. He loves his veteran QBs and this will be the best player he's ever had to work with. Mayock might not love it but it's pretty clear Gruden has the real power there anyway.

Better than Rich? Brad??  :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Scoremore said:

2 1sts a 2nd and a player think that's just about right.  Packers are probably going to dig in.  Think it's a mistake if you can get a decent return just show him the door and move on.  This convo will really heat up when he doesn't report. 

Yeah depends on the deal but if they're staring at a haul they gotta pull the trigger

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kepler said:

Yeah depends on the deal but if they're staring at a haul they gotta pull the trigger

For god sakes I would hope so.  Prepare to be royally ticked when the Packers dig in and refuse to trade him.  I would view that as a historic mistake.  Think we are all going to be real angry come summer.  I don't want to ever see him in a Packer uniform again after that stunt on draft day.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I just hope we take all their weapons and include MVS in the deal.

I would laugh until I could literally not laugh anymore. 

 

Nah we'll keep MVS let's give him ESB.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

I've seen some very high guesses that seem way too much. Given that Rodgers is 38, the absolute most I'd expect is 2x1sts, perhaps one lower pick, and a player. The least I'd expect is a high 1st, one lower pick, and and 2 players.

You need to bear in mind if Packers trade him they have to eat 37m of dead cap. Regardless of whether its this year or split up over two years, that is an extreme amount of cap hit to eat.  We would probably be better off letting him retire and getting a chunk of that back than trading him for anything less than two 1sts. 

Given the cap situation, any players included would have to be early in a rookie contract. Our cap is a car crash and if we are eating 37m dead money then we can't afford to take on big contracts. 

Given what Stafford and players like Palmer received in compensation,  the dead hit absorbed ( as discussed above), the fact it probably closes our window,  the fact it screws everything we have done this off-season and we are taking about the reigning MVP ..

I would ask for three 1sts minimum  and tell him to retire if he wants if we don't get it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

much rather have waller than ruggs in a possible trade

LV: waller +2 firsts +2seconds
Denver: Fant + Jeudy + Fuller (if its possible), a first and a second. 

Does Von have it still? i know he was talked about as a cap casualty this year.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on when the trade happens - getting players in return is bad value. For example, if Rodgers is traded June 2nd, getting Noah Fant would be a wasted asset

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Depending on when the trade happens - getting players in return is bad value. For example, if Rodgers is traded June 2nd, getting Noah Fant would be a wasted asset

Why would you say Fant would be a wasted asset?

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...