Jump to content

Packers Trade For Nobody Day 557


MacReady

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Don't know about trades, but call me crazy . . . I think this is the year OBJ happens. 

OBJ might be someone that MIN would consider adding as a 2/3rd WR option behind Jefferson

He likely has some connection with the HC having come from LAR and would probably know the system a bit more.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Brat&Beer said:

I don't think he does. However, I believe the contract is structured in such a way that a trade would result in such a cap hit that there's no way the Packers would do it.  

In regards to Rodgers and a possible trade.

I'm a solid "no".  I get wanting picks and rebuilding.  But to me it's about an NFL icon playing for one franchise.  To me, he's earned that.  I want him to retire a Packer, whenever that happens.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

In regards to Rodgers and a possible trade.

I'm a solid "no".  I get wanting picks and rebuilding.  But to me it's about an NFL icon playing for one franchise.  To me, he's earned that.  I want him to retire a Packer, whenever that happens.

I usually agree with you. Your comments are always well thought out and spot on, but with this I have to disagree. The franchise/team is more important than any individual player or coach. If it helps the team to trade Rodgers, then trade him. That's why I was on the "trade Rodgers" team this past off season.  The contract he got was not commensurate with his declining skills/aging body, and he was making a fuss. Additionally, he doesn't seem to want to run MLF's offense. He wants "hero ball" instead. Unfortunately, it may be too late to trade him now. Gute blew this franchise up with Rodgers' new contract. We are in for years of 70's, 80's type hurt I'm afraid. Both Murphy and Gute should be shown the door for what they did to this franchise with that contract. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

I usually agree with you. Your comments are always well thought out and spot on, but with this I have to disagree. The franchise/team is more important than any individual player or coach. If it helps the team to trade Rodgers, then trade him. That's why I was on the "trade Rodgers" team this past off season.  The contract he got was not commensurate with his declining skills/aging body, and he was making a fuss. Additionally, he doesn't seem to want to run MLF's offense. He wants "hero ball" instead. Unfortunately, it may be too late to trade him now. Gute blew this franchise up with Rodgers' new contract. We are in for years of 70's, 80's type hurt I'm afraid. Both Murphy and Gute should be shown the door for what they did to this franchise with that contract. 

No worries, I have a different take.  And...I'm not a Rodgers worshipper.  I criticize him when I feel it is warranted.

If what we heard was true...he signed that deal with the intention on both sides being that he will retire a Packer, whenever that day arrives.

The key to whole thing is....if what we heard was true.  And I think it's pretty cool to have this NFL icon play for only one franchise for his entire career.  I feel like both he and GB have earned that.

So...I feel like the club needs to honor that agreement.  And let's be fair...he was coming off of 2 MVP seasons...in a row.  Let's not pretend like his skills were diminishing.  Right now it looks like it...but it certainly did not back then.

And I guess I'm not worried about GB going back to the 70's or 80's in terms of play.  We have a lot of young talent on the roster.  And we do have our next QB waiting in the wings.  I feel like we are a guard and WR away from being very good.

And this is odd for me to type considering I've been on the "Packer suck now" bandwagon for the past 2-3 weeks.  LOL!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of the box player-for-player trade: Chase Claypool for Eric Stokes (and probably a swap of late picks in our favor). To start, Claypool and Stokes are similar in that they are still on their rookie deals, Claypool in his 3rd year vs. Stokes in his 2nd. Stokes does come with the 5th year option, hence why we'd probably swaps some picks as well to sweeten the deal for GB. Stokes is struggling in year 2 for Green Bay, and quite frankly, I think this defense is better overall with Alexander-Douglas-Nixon (slot) versus Alexander-Stokes-Douglas(slot). 

Alexander and Douglas are both under contract for the next 2 years+ after this season so you have your outside starters even if Stokes goes. 

Now, if you can truly get Claypool for a mid-round pick and keep Stokes, fine do it without losing the player. But if the Packers are considering keeping Barry and this defensive scheme past this season, I'm not really sure you're going to see much improvement out of Stokes because we literally play him in a way that accentuates his weaknesses. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Out of the box player-for-player trade: Chase Claypool for Eric Stokes (and probably a swap of late picks in our favor). To start, Claypool and Stokes are similar in that they are still on their rookie deals, Claypool in his 3rd year vs. Stokes in his 2nd. Stokes does come with the 5th year option, hence why we'd probably swaps some picks as well to sweeten the deal for GB. Stokes is struggling in year 2 for Green Bay, and quite frankly, I think this defense is better overall with Alexander-Douglas-Nixon (slot) versus Alexander-Stokes-Douglas(slot). 

Alexander and Douglas are both under contract for the next 2 years+ after this season so you have your outside starters even if Stokes goes. 

Now, if you can truly get Claypool for a mid-round pick and keep Stokes, fine do it without losing the player. But if the Packers are considering keeping Barry and this defensive scheme past this season, I'm not really sure you're going to see much improvement out of Stokes because we literally play him in a way that accentuates his weaknesses. 

Heck no

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, MaryTsraining3s said:

Without taking contracts much into play, I’d say some names that could be possible: DJ Moore, Tyler Locket, Brandin Cooks, Chase Claypool, Jarvis Landry, Mike Thomas.....less than 1% chance: Deandre Hopkins, Keenan Allen 

Always liked Cooks but his contract is too big

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Out of the box player-for-player trade: Chase Claypool for Eric Stokes (and probably a swap of late picks in our favor). To start, Claypool and Stokes are similar in that they are still on their rookie deals, Claypool in his 3rd year vs. Stokes in his 2nd. Stokes does come with the 5th year option, hence why we'd probably swaps some picks as well to sweeten the deal for GB. Stokes is struggling in year 2 for Green Bay, and quite frankly, I think this defense is better overall with Alexander-Douglas-Nixon (slot) versus Alexander-Stokes-Douglas(slot). 

Alexander and Douglas are both under contract for the next 2 years+ after this season so you have your outside starters even if Stokes goes. 

Now, if you can truly get Claypool for a mid-round pick and keep Stokes, fine do it without losing the player. But if the Packers are considering keeping Barry and this defensive scheme past this season, I'm not really sure you're going to see much improvement out of Stokes because we literally play him in a way that accentuates his weaknesses. 

This is the dumbest trade opportunity I've read on here since someone suggested we trade Jaire for Deebo. @vegas492

  • Like 4
Link to comment
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...