What's Aaron Rodgers trade value?

[Mr Bad Example]

11 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Tom Brady played into his mid-40s. Drew Brees played past 40. Brett Favre played past 40. Big Ben played to 39. Phillip Rivers played to 39. Peyton Manning played until 39.

And the "washed" ratio of those guys in their last season is pretty 50/50. Brady was still great, Ben was washed, Favre had a great season in '09 but was pretty uneven in his last 3 yrs, Manning was shot, Brees was effective despite his arm being done, Rivers was OK. 

[Broncofan]

I really don't know that the physical age-40 argument matters nearly as much as A-Rod acknowledging he was close to retiring this offseason.    You do not see guys stick around much longer once the R word comes out, especially if they're not in their prime (and I think we can all agree there).   TB12 is actually a great example of this.

Edited March 15, 2023 by Broncofan

[Soko]

15 minutes ago, seminoles1 said:

How many were actually good at those ages though?

I mean, not as good as their primes (except arguably Brady). Peyton at 40 was a zombie, although at 39 he still clearly had it. Vikings Favre was nasty. 

Point of the matter is that teams in 2008 were expecting much less out of Favre than people remember. Coming off those seasons, at his age. Rodgers isn’t going to get the same age excuse, justifiably so or not, in large part because of the trend of QBs playing at plus levels late in their careers.

[NYRaider]

1 minute ago, Yin-Yang said:

I mean, not as good as their primes (except arguably Brady). Peyton at 40 was a zombie, although at 39 he still clearly had it. Vikings Favre was nasty. 

Point of the matter is that teams in 2008 were expecting much less out of Favre than people remember. Coming off those seasons, at his age. Rodgers isn’t going to get the same age excuse, justifiably so or not, in large part because of the trend of QBs playing at plus levels late in their careers.

Favre was also dookie in 2/3 of his last years with Green Bay. Rodgers just won back to back MVPs.

[Soko]

7 minutes ago, Mr Bad Example said:

And the "washed" ratio of those guys in their last season is pretty 50/50. Brady was still great, Ben was washed, Favre had a great season in '09 but was pretty uneven in his last 3 yrs, Manning was shot, Brees was effective despite his arm being done, Rivers was OK. 

 

1 minute ago, Yin-Yang said:

I mean, not as good as their primes (except arguably Brady). Peyton at 40 was a zombie, although at 39 he still clearly had it. Vikings Favre was nasty. 

Point of the matter is that teams in 2008 were expecting much less out of Favre than people remember. Coming off those seasons, at his age. Rodgers isn’t going to get the same age excuse, justifiably so or not, in large part because of the trend of QBs playing at plus levels late in their careers.

 

[Soko]

1 minute ago, NYRaider said:

Favre was also dookie in 2/3 of his last years with Green Bay. Rodgers just won back to back MVPs.

 

2 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

Favre was coming off an okay season, but that was an anamoly compared to the two actually bad seasons he had prior to 07. Not like 22 Rodgers, actually just bad QB play from Favre. Rodgers prior to last year was the back to back MVP. 

 

1 hour ago, Yin-Yang said:

Favre, in an age where no one played at 40, was coming off two seasons of backup level QB play, and one season of alright play.

Rodgers, in an age where there are guys playing at 40+, is coming off two back to back MVP seasons, and one season of alright play. 
 

 

 

41 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Favre was coming off horrible seasons and then had a swan song kind of season in 2007 (until NY ruined all the fun in 2007…and I mean ALL the fun), there was no telling what he’d be like in NY. With Rodgers there’s a completely different expectation. 

 

[incognito_man]

34 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

3 things I'd stake a good chunk of my bankroll on:

1.  No one has any idea if A-Rod plays beyond this year.    That alone makes the idea of conditional picks added to a main pick as a no-brainer.   And the idea of 2 1sts as beyond crazy.   It's not a physical question - A-Rod himself said he was 90 percent ready to retire when he went into darkness (lol).     When that happens, counting on multiple years is just insane. 

2.  The QB market pretty much is dry - so waiting this long, I'd be pretty comfortable saying a 1st is going to GB.  The question is which 1st - 2024 1st (more likely to be later position-wise, and obv have to wait) or the 1.13.

3.  There is more pressure on NYJ to get the deal done, now that A-Rod has made it clear he's OK with going there.   But it only goes so far, too.   If GB is seen as unreasonable, then there is a point in which the NYJ FO said "hey, we're trying, but price X is just a bridge too far".    For example, that talk of 2 1sts - crazy when you have no idea on how long A-Rod is going to play for. 

Now, a couple of X-factors:

1.  How much $ GB is absorbing for NYJ for A-Rod's salary - that influences the pick return in a massive way.

2. Does GB want to spend $ on specific FA player targets?   I say GB because I don't think NYJ have a lot of FA needs, but if the Jets do have a key target, it works both ways.   GB has 20M in space, but a trade will drop that by 8M, and obv any $ they assume will influence the final $ too.    They can do restructures to create more space, but it's fair to say if GB feels they have to get a certain FA, that will influence them to resolve this.   Now, if there's a guy NYJ wants (besides A-Rod) that could sign elsewhere without resolution, the knife cuts both ways.   Point being, this may force a final decision on the return as well.

To me, I'd guess it's either 1.13 & some type of pick swap later on for 2023/4, or it's 2014 1st + conditional pick.   Just my guess.  

I agree with a lot of what you said.

Reading between the lines, the two sides have been arguing in the media about whether it was a Matthew Stafford type trade, a "reasonable" trade, or wording that GB was asking "too much" and that it was "multiple firsts"

So my guess is GB is asking for 2023 1.13, a conditional 2024 pick for Aaron just being rostered prior to the draft (a first if he is, a third or less or nothing if he isn't), and a young, but fringe, player.

That package is defensible from each perspective we've heard reported. It COULD be multiple firsts, it's similar to Stafford's, and it's not unreasonable because it's much less than two firsts if he only plays one year.

*Edit - and the open issues:

-reworking Aaron's contract to fit the conditional picks in the trade that works for everyone (i.e. Jets force him to decide on 2024 prior to day they'd have to give GB a 1st if he's on the roster)

-if the 2024 pick should be a 3rd, 4th, etc etc. or nothing more if he's not rostered in 2024

-the player

Edited March 15, 2023 by incognito_man

[Greene N White]

1 hour ago, NYRaider said:

Elijah Moore and a conditional pick next year seems like a fair middle ground.

Bro Elijah Moore the guy who beefed with Matt lafleurs brother week in and week out? Don’t think that’s happening.

[NYRaider]

Just now, Greene N White said:

Bro Elijah Moore the guy who beefed with Matt lafleurs brother week in and week out? Don’t think that’s happening.

I don't keep up with Elijah Moore's personal beefs, my b.

[incognito_man]

Well everyone it's page 100, have we decided on the answer or should I book the conference room for tomorrow again?

[NYRaider]

Just now, incognito_man said:

Well everyone it's page 100, have we decided on the answer or should I book the conference room for tomorrow again?

To Packer and non-Packer fans he's worth at least a FRP

To Jets fans and supporters he's worth a 4th, if that

[Greene N White]

1 minute ago, NYRaider said:

I don't keep up with Elijah Moore's personal beefs, my b.

You don’t seem to keep up with a lot of nfl news. Apparently a ton of quarterbacks are playing into their 40s nowadays when it was quite literally 1 guy and Russell Wilson had a horrible season in 2021 when it was better statistically than Rodgers in 2022

[Greene N White]

2 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

To Packer and non-Packer fans he's worth at least a FRP

To Jets fans and supporters he's worth a 4th, if that

I mean I’m a jets fan and I said a 2023 2nd and 2024 conditional pick

[NYRaider]

Just now, Greene N White said:

You don’t seem to keep up with a lot of nfl news. Apparently a ton of quarterbacks are playing into their 40s nowadays when it was quite literally 1 guy and Russell Wilson had a horrible season in 2021 when it was better statistically than Rodgers in 2022

I'm not sure where I ever said or implied that a lot of QB's are playing into their 40s. I'd put Rodgers into the same outlier category as Tom Brady though, but I do make exceptions for GOAT level players. I also never said that Wilson had a horrible season, I said that he was coming off of a down / injury plagued year. Which is because I watched him miss games due to a finger injury and then not look great for a good portion of the season after he came back, it was also the first time in his career he had a losing record. With as much as you drag Rodgers, Jets would probably be better off running it back with Zach Wilson.

[NYRaider]

2 minutes ago, Greene N White said:

I mean I’m a jets fan and I said a 2023 2nd and 2024 conditional pick

Which isn't significantly more than what I said he should probably be valued at, a FRP and a conditional 2024 pick.