Packers Trade For Nobody Day 557

[cannondale]

Easy to be the keyboard warrior GM. But there isn't a single person here that would have played it any differently if in Gute's shoes with mouths to feed. There are only 32 of those jobs and it's a million times better than scouting punters in Montana, which is where he likely ends up with trading Rodgers on his resume. Futhermore, he knows it could take a decade to find another QB, if ever. 

Edited November 1, 2022 by cannondale

[Mazrimiv]

56 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Not sure what I'm more disappointed in....

Not trading for anyone.

Or not selling anyone.

To do neither seems foolish.

This is where I am at.  I didn't actually care that much whether GB decided to be buyers or sellers, but standing pat makes no sense.

[incognito_man]

Just now, Mazrimiv said:

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

Not sure what I'm more disappointed in....

Not trading for anyone.

Or not selling anyone.

To do neither seems foolish.

This is where I am at.  I didn't actually care that much whether GB decided to be buyers or sellers, but standing pat makes no sense.

in order of what makes sense to me:

1a) Acquisition (if value is there)

1b) Standing pat

Distant 3rd) Selling

[Mazrimiv]

2 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

in order of what makes sense to me:

1a) Acquisition (if value is there)

1b) Standing pat

Distant 3rd) Selling

I would have rather offloaded Jones for whatever we could get and let this iteration of the team flame out altogether.

[chefj85]

Im not at all surprised we didnt do anything.

 

were not 1 player away from being a contender so itd do little. 
 

the org is gonna have a lot of soul searching to do after this season.

[Old Guy]

1 hour ago, pgwingman said:

Well my assumption is that if we traded him 2 years ago he would have comparable seasons to what he played for us in 2020 and 2021. I don't think it's logical to say he would have played much worst because we traded him.

It actually is because of the chemistry between him and Adams. That would not have existed with any other team/WR. 

[Striker]

1 hour ago, PackFan13 said:

This is the only time I wish we had an owner. Gute would be gone and we could start fresh. He's proven to lack the ability to get it done. Literally botched our last year's as true contenders. 

Good owners aren't trigger happy with firings and trust the GM's process, even when middling/bad seasons happen.

The Bucs gave their GM 5 seasons and 3 head coaches to figure it out (plus a 7-9 season under Arians).

Kevin Colbert has been GM of the Steelers since 2010 and they've missed the playoffs four times with some real middling seasons packed in there.

John Schneider's teams have been trending towards being real middle of the road over the past few years and he's still secure, even with trading Wilson (which looks like a real smart move now).

Loomis has been with the Saints as GM since 2002. Their '17 to '20 run is probably similar to the Packers under Gute in terms of "all in" for the window with the older QB. And now they're kind of just...existing.

Now, I do disagree with the way Gute handled Rodgers this offseason, but he's helped build/manage a team that has seen good success the past three seasons. Let's not pretend those seasons didn't happen.

Edited November 1, 2022 by Striker

[Striker]

 

[Arthur Penske]

2 minutes ago, Striker said:

 

Basically what I thought.

wonder what if would have taken to sweeten the deal enough to overcome chicagos expected higher draft pick?

[Norm]

38 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Norm thinks that's incorrect and we'll be seeing Love next year?

No. But that entire statement being put out as fact is silly.

He might suck, he absolutely hasn't played with to prove that, but he probably does though.

Gone after this year? No certainty.

A FEW more years, meh. Good luck predicting when Aaron and GB part. I wouldn't be shocked AT ALL if he retired or tried to get traded after this year. 

[Norm]

36 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

You made 3 assertions in your post. Any of those 3 could be incorrect and we still wouldn't see Love next year.

Lol damnit should have looked for this first

[Norm]

9 minutes ago, Striker said:

 

Sure. Yep. Sure 

[Striker]

2 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Basically what I thought.

wonder what if would have taken to sweeten the deal enough to overcome chicagos expected higher draft pick?

Going by Rich Hill's chart (though the numbers are similar-ish on the Jimmy Johnson chart):

Assuming Chicago picks, let's say, 6th in round 2 and the Packers manage to mid their way into pick #18.

By this year's values, 2/6 is worth 157 points.

2/18 is 115. So to exceed that they'd need to give up 2/18 (115) plus 3/18 (54). 4 through 7 are 24/10/5/2.

[packfanfb]

13 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Basically what I thought.

wonder what if would have taken to sweeten the deal enough to overcome chicagos expected higher draft pick?

I'm not even upset we missed out on Claypool but frankly this news makes Gute look even worse. If you like the guy that much to offer a 2 you have to get the deal done. Add a pick, player, whatever. This only shows Gute continues to be the guy who can't close a sale. 

[cannondale]

3 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I'm not even upset we missed out on Claypool but frankly this news makes Gute look even worse. If you like the guy that much to offer a 2 you have to get the deal done. Add a pick, player, whatever. This only shows Gute continues to be the guy who can't close a sale. 

Claypool barely moves the needle and if there is any hint of drama in the locker room, Claypool is the last guy you want to add to that mix. I'm a bit iffy on whether to believe we were interested.