OneTwoSixFive Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 (edited) Trading scenarios: A deal with Carolina. We get their 33, they get our 25 and we swap 3rds (65 for 91). On the JJ chart we lose out by 11 points. Packers now have 33, 41, 58, 65, 88, 126 Panthers now have 25, 39, 91, 101 Essentially the Packers move down 8 spots from 25, and gain 26 spots in round 3 (65 instead of 91). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A deal with Arizona. The Packers get Arizona's 2nd and two of their 3x 3rds for their own first and second (25 and 58). Value is equal. Packers now have 35, 41, 66, 71, 89, 91, 126. Arizona now has 4, 25, 27, 58, 90, 104. Would 3x 1st round picks be attractive to Arizona while they still retain a 3rd and 4th round pick - who knows ? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A deal with the Giants. Packers give up 41 and 169 for Giants, 47 and 107. I guess it all depends on who the Packers like and whether their calculations come to pass. Edited April 23 by OneTwoSixFive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 52 minutes ago, MaximusGluteus said: At first glance I read this as "it saves erections". I need caffeine. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NFLGURU Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 (edited) I dont think Guyton and Mims are plug and play. Both of those guys are going to need some time, maybe a season to get ready to start. If the Packers are good with that then go for it. I think you can get similar talent with a later pick. Edited April 23 by NFLGURU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilltray Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 4 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said: Trading scenarios: A deal with Carolina. We get their 33, they get our 25 and we swap 3rds (65 for 91). On the JJ chart we lose out by 11 points. Packers now have 33, 41, 58, 65, 88, 126 Panthers now have 25, 39, 91, 101 Essentially the Packers move down 8 spots from 25, and gain 26 spots in round 3 (65 instead of 91). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A deal with Arizona The Packers get Arizona's 2nd and two of their 3x 3rds for their own first and second (25 and 58). Value is equal. Packers now have 35, 41, 66, 71, 89, 91, 126. Arizona now has 4, 25, 27, 58, 90, 104. Would 3x 1st round picks be attractive to Arizona while they still retain a 3rd and 4th round pick - who knows ? I don't like that at all, especially given GB's track record with 3rds lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 (edited) 4 minutes ago, spilltray said: I don't like that at all, especially given GB's track record with 3rds lol. You flipped a coin 4 times and got 4 heads. What are the odds of a head on the next roll ? As I see it, the marrying of Packers needs and where we think the talent will fall, means the bottom of round two to the top half of round three is the sweet spot for several nice prospects. Edited April 23 by OneTwoSixFive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 1 minute ago, OneTwoSixFive said: You flipped a coin 4 times and got 4 heads. What are the odds of a head on the next roll ? still 50/50 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 We were talking about the variance of opinion on Suamataia yesterday... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 (edited) 5 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said: still 50/50 Exactly. Bad picks in round 3 is a thing.................until it isn't. Past performance is not much of an indicator. Edited April 23 by OneTwoSixFive 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReasonablySober Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 PFF hates the "All Visits" mock.* *almost all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgbeethree Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 1 hour ago, OneTwoSixFive said: You flipped a coin 4 times and got 4 heads. What are the odds of a head on the next roll ? 1 hour ago, ThatJerkDave said: still 50/50 1 hour ago, OneTwoSixFive said: Exactly No. There's significant variances based on the coin, the flipping technique, and which side is facing up when tossed. And yes, I am fun at parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 1 minute ago, wgbeethree said: No. There's significant variances based on the coin, the flipping technique, and which side is facing up when tossed. And yes, I am fun at parties. All bets are off if you are a magician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 2 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said: Trading scenarios: A deal with Carolina. We get their 33, they get our 25 and we swap 3rds (65 for 91). ....... Dumb question. Do the trade charts already factor in the value of 5th-year option for 1st-rounders? I'm looking at a Drafttek chart and they do **not** seem to consider that. I'm kinda wondering whether giving away that 5th option year is more costly than we appreciate, when we consider small trade-downs from back-of-1st into front-of-2nd round? *IF* the player is a success (sure hoping so....), losing that year of club control is a bummer. Also pushes up extension decisions sooner. More time to track the player, see how he handles success, see whether he keeps improving or maybe stalls or relapses a little? Sometimes extension assumes arrow-up and that a guy will just keep improving, which doesn't always prove true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 23 minutes ago, craig said: Dumb question. Do the trade charts already factor in the value of 5th-year option for 1st-rounders? I'm looking at a Drafttek chart and they do **not** seem to consider that. I'm kinda wondering whether giving away that 5th option year is more costly than we appreciate, when we consider small trade-downs from back-of-1st into front-of-2nd round? *IF* the player is a success (sure hoping so....), losing that year of club control is a bummer. Also pushes up extension decisions sooner. More time to track the player, see how he handles success, see whether he keeps improving or maybe stalls or relapses a little? Sometimes extension assumes arrow-up and that a guy will just keep improving, which doesn't always prove true. If it makes you feel better, I had the same dumb question. I am pretty sure the only reason that Christian Watson wasn't a first rounder was because Minnesota wanted the 5th year option for Cyprien (I think it was him), so they traded us 34 instead of 30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted April 23 Share Posted April 23 (edited) 38 minutes ago, Leader said: Telling you guys...the buzz is real. Also, I'm not sure any prospect has been more slept on this entire cycle than Junior Colson. Doesn't help that he didn't test during the pre-draft process, but speaking as a certainly biased Michigan guy, Colson can flat out play and he's a great culture guy. If we go ILB in early round 2 and it's not Cooper, I'd be perfectly content with Colson. Edited April 23 by packfanfb 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts