squire12 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 22 minutes ago, skibrett15 said: we also might see the packers throw less often. Assuming Cobb gets his 40-50 targets as the 3. Probably a signee as either the 2 or the 1 will determine whether we have a split like this, or just a mess of 50-70 target guys including a bunch of TEs at 20-40, gadget RB/WR guys getting 20, etc. I would say the TE and RB group could take a bump up. THe WR is very much going to be spread across the top 3 more evenly vs the Adams getting nearly 150 targets. I think that is why the offense has bee pretty good when Adams has been out, the ball is moved around and having 3 WR getting between 70-100 targets along with the RB and TE options means the defense has a harder time shutting down the main focus. Having 3-4 WR that are #2/3 types makes it harder for the defense to shift focus to anyone. Lazard, MVS (assuming he is back), Cobb, draft pick 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{Family Ghost} Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 (edited) I've got a question .. if Davante was given the non exclusive franchise tag and the Packers actually matched the offer from the Raiders then why didn't the Packers get (2) #1's from the Raiders? Did the Packers view a 2nd this year as more valuable than a 1st next year? I don't quite understand what all went down here. Edited March 19, 2022 by {Family Ghost} Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R T Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 22 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said: I've got a question .. if Davante was given the non exclusive franchise tag and the Packers actually matched the offer from the Raiders then why didn't the Packers get (2) #1's from the Raiders? Did the Packers view a 2nd this year as more valuable than a 1st next year? I don't quite understand what all went down here. There was never an actual signed offer from the Raiders, it never got to that point. They franchised him at which point Adams and agent probably informed them that he wasn't coming back and wished to be traded. The Packers moved forward and did what was best for everyone by just trading him for the picks. By doing it quickly it gave them the cap flexibility to help the roster now. A win-win for both sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{Family Ghost} Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 14 minutes ago, R T said: There was never an actual signed offer from the Raiders, it never got to that point. They franchised him at which point Adams and agent probably informed them that he wasn't coming back and wished to be traded. The Packers moved forward and did what was best for everyone by just trading him for the picks. By doing it quickly it gave them the cap flexibility to help the roster now. A win-win for both sides. Makes sense, but it seems the Packers might have been able to coax just a bit more from the raiders. The timing works out well for the Packers though as they will get a few more guys signed they probably thought were gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R T Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 1 minute ago, {Family Ghost} said: Makes sense, but it seems the Packers might have been able to coax just a bit more from the raiders. The timing works out well for the Packers though as they will get a few more guys signed they probably thought were gone. My guess and it's just a guess, but the 2nd as an extra pick was probably the coaxing sweetener. Doubt the Raiders said here is a 1st and 2nd and the Packers just said OK. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 1 hour ago, {Family Ghost} said: I've got a question .. if Davante was given the non exclusive franchise tag and the Packers actually matched the offer from the Raiders then why didn't the Packers get (2) #1's from the Raiders? Did the Packers view a 2nd this year as more valuable than a 1st next year? I don't quite understand what all went down here. It was a trade and then the Raiders and Adams reached a long-term extension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 48 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said: Makes sense, but it seems the Packers might have been able to coax just a bit more from the raiders. The timing works out well for the Packers though as they will get a few more guys signed they probably thought were gone. Could they have? Possibly. But other then maybe getting a '23 FRP, I'm not sure the Packers would have gotten much more. And they could have possibly gotten the Raiders to go in another direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 44 minutes ago, R T said: My guess and it's just a guess, but the 2nd as an extra pick was probably the coaxing sweetener. Doubt the Raiders said here is a 1st and 2nd and the Packers just said OK. I'd venture a guess that it started off as a FRP and a 3rd round pick, and the Packers asked for a FRP this year and a FRP next year. Seems like the FRP and SRP were the happy medium between the two sides. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{Family Ghost} Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 15 minutes ago, CWood21 said: I'd venture a guess that it started off as a FRP and a 3rd round pick, and the Packers asked for a FRP this year and a FRP next year. Seems like the FRP and SRP were the happy medium between the two sides. All the Packers had to do to get (2) 1's is tell the Raiders to right up the offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravedigger93 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 39 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said: All the Packers had to do to get (2) 1's is tell the Raiders to right up the offer. If there wasn't an offer sheet from the Raiders, the Packers don't have anything to not match. The Raiders probably reached out to the Packers saying we won't provide an offer sheet that you can match, but we would trade XYZ picks for him. Both the Raiders and Packers knew that he isn't gonna play under the tag, so it was negotiations to get the best deal for both parties. And I prefer a 2nd 2022 over a 1st 2023 anyway. One more quality player early with the small window we have with Rodgers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 1 hour ago, {Family Ghost} said: All the Packers had to do to get (2) 1's is tell the Raiders to right up the offer. Write. But also I believe the Raiders needed 2 FRPs just to make an offer sheet, which they didn't have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 1 hour ago, Gravedigger93 said: If there wasn't an offer sheet from the Raiders, the Packers don't have anything to not match. The Raiders probably reached out to the Packers saying we won't provide an offer sheet that you can match, but we would trade XYZ picks for him. Both the Raiders and Packers knew that he isn't gonna play under the tag, so it was negotiations to get the best deal for both parties. And I prefer a 2nd 2022 over a 1st 2023 anyway. One more quality player early with the small window we have with Rodgers. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you actually have to have two FRPs in the same draft to sign a franchise tagged player. But I'm sure there was a quick phone call as soon as the legal tampering period began where the Raiders told the Gute that they were willing to deal for Davante Adams. LIS, I'm sure the Packers used the franchise tag compensation as their baseline for value and the Raiders probably came in below that. But they met in the middle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 3 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you actually have to have two FRPs in the same draft to sign a franchise tagged player. I looked this up in the CBA, it just says "two first round picks" with no reference to when. However, this has never happened (and is unlikely to ever happen) since the better choice is "call the team who tagged the player first and see if you can trade for the player" since that removes the chance of them matching the offer and the NFL doesn't really want teams to try to sign players to offer sheets that the tagging team is unable to match (recall the "Poison Pill" issue with Steve Hutchinson which lead to some rules changes). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{Family Ghost} Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 9 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Write. But also I believe the Raiders needed 2 FRPs just to make an offer sheet, which they didn't have. I think it can be firsts in consecutive years, but I could be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 20, 2022 Share Posted March 20, 2022 1 minute ago, PossibleCabbage said: I looked this up in the CBA, it just says "two first round picks" with no reference to when. However, this has never happened (and is unlikely to ever happen) since the better choice is "call the team who tagged the player first and see if you can trade for the player" since that removes the chance of them matching the offer and the NFL doesn't really want teams to try to sign players to offer sheets that the tagging team is unable to match (recall the "Poison Pill" issue with Steve Hutchinson which lead to some rules changes). I'm going completely off of memory, so I could be wrong here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.