Random Packer News & Notes

[AlexGreen#20]

5 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Gute has shown you what a salary cap actually limits and what it doesn't. Ted didn't fail to acquire outside talent through trades because the "salary cap." His philosophy to roster building was night and day different than Wolf. 

As for Snead, simply pointing to the end result is a loser's argument, for both sides. Snead only has 1 SB, but 2 appearances. Thompson only had 1 appearance/win, Wolf had 2 appearances, and Gute so far is O-fer. Winning is hard anyways and things happen. I'm merely talking about a preference in terms of how I think a GM should run a team, depending on what stage or level that team is currently at talent-wise. Bad teams should not trade for expensive players (i.e. the Bears trading for Mack--that was dumb when you have Trubisky at QB). The Rams trading whatever they had to for Von Miller was smart. Doesn't have to be a big-time trade either. Just be willing to give up a damn 3rd-4th round pick every now and then.  

We've got Aaron Donald's cap hit in Dead Cap this year. 

Thompson's issue with trades was never lost picks. It was always about the cap. 

You don't want Les Snead's team building style. You want Les Snead's team building style when it works. You sure as **** weren't here in 2016 advocating for Les Snead's style. 

[R T]

13 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

You need both. Admit that to yourself and I think we're fine. 

Now you are attempting to make this look like an anti-trade thing. Trades are fine in very special situations but should not be a main focus in building a roster. The 'sky is falling' part of the fanbase wants to trade for every washed-up rental that is made available, and they are very seldom a good idea. Admit that to yourself and you will be on your way. 

[vegas492]

36 minutes ago, R T said:

Now you are attempting to make this look like an anti-trade thing. Trades are fine in very special situations but should not be a main focus in building a roster. The 'sky is falling' part of the fanbase wants to trade for every washed-up rental that is made available, and they are very seldom a good idea. Admit that to yourself and you will be on your way. 

Would you have done the Miller trade?  (I've got no agenda here, just curious.)  I thought it was too much to invest in an old rental player, but it sure worked out for them in the short term.

How about Ramsey?  That's one I would have done in a heartbeat.

Stafford?  That one took stones.  

[R T]

4 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Would you have done the Miller trade?  (I've got no agenda here, just curious.)  I thought it was too much to invest in an old rental player, but it sure worked out for them in the short term.

How about Ramsey?  That's one I would have done in a heartbeat.

Stafford?  That one took stones.  

It is team and situation specific. I wouldn't have traded for Miller at that price for any team. The Stafford trade made a lot of sense for the Rams and because of the Goff failure it was a must for them. Ramsey would be a good debate either way, but fans just look at what they got and ignore what they gave up.

Example for Packers fans is the Mack trade to Chicago and how many fans at the time felt the Packers should have given up the two 1st round picks and gave him the record setting contract. Instead, the Packers used those same assets and drafted Gary and Savage and used the salary cap money to sign Z. Smith and P. Smith. Which of those two deals ended up better?   

 

[vegas492]

58 minutes ago, R T said:

It is team and situation specific. I wouldn't have traded for Miller at that price for any team. The Stafford trade made a lot of sense for the Rams and because of the Goff failure it was a must for them. Ramsey would be a good debate either way, but fans just look at what they got and ignore what they gave up.

Example for Packers fans is the Mack trade to Chicago and how many fans at the time felt the Packers should have given up the two 1st round picks and gave him the record setting contract. Instead, the Packers used those same assets and drafted Gary and Savage and used the salary cap money to sign Z. Smith and P. Smith. Which of those two deals ended up better?   

 

I wouldn't have done Miller either.

Ramsey, easy yes from me.

Stafford?  That was a tough one for me at the time.  It was a lot to give up for a QB who was aged and who had never tasted real success.  Obviously worked out for them.  Didn't look so good when he was on his pick 6 extravaganza.

Mack.  2018 trade, right?  

I was for trading for Mack.  And I'm not apologizing for that.  I felt at the time that Mack with Rodgers would have meant a Super Bowl title or two.  I don't think I was wrong for thinking that, because GB tried hard to pull that trade off, and the Raiders simply traded with the team that they thought would have the worse record and therefore the better picks.  (They were wrong.)

I've got no issues with the non-trade.  We did make out just fine.  But we still haven't won much in the postseason.  

We are set up for future success because of that non-trade.  Better than we would be if we had traded for him.  But I still feel like we'd have another shiny trophy had that trade happened.

Kind of like we will have to wait and see how these blockbuster trades and contracts age for the Rams and their roster.

[R T]

16 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

I wouldn't have done Miller either.

Ramsey, easy yes from me.

Stafford?  That was a tough one for me at the time.  It was a lot to give up for a QB who was aged and who had never tasted real success.  Obviously worked out for them.  Didn't look so good when he was on his pick 6 extravaganza.

Mack.  2018 trade, right?  

I was for trading for Mack.  And I'm not apologizing for that.  I felt at the time that Mack with Rodgers would have meant a Super Bowl title or two.  I don't think I was wrong for thinking that, because GB tried hard to pull that trade off, and the Raiders simply traded with the team that they thought would have the worse record and therefore the better picks.  (They were wrong.)

I've got no issues with the non-trade.  We did make out just fine.  But we still haven't won much in the postseason.  

We are set up for future success because of that non-trade.  Better than we would be if we had traded for him.  But I still feel like we'd have another shiny trophy had that trade happened.

Kind of like we will have to wait and see how these blockbuster trades and contracts age for the Rams and their roster.

That is just assuming something and trying to make it true. The Packers have had the best team in the NFL the last 2 seasons and still found a way to not win a SB. If they trade for Mack they are probably better for the first season, but they were better with the Smith brothers over what they would of been with Mack every season after that.  

[vegas492]

1 hour ago, R T said:

That is just assuming something and trying to make it true. The Packers have had the best team in the NFL the last 2 seasons and still found a way to not win a SB. If they trade for Mack they are probably better for the first season, but they were better with the Smith brothers over what they would of been with Mack every season after that.  

Much like me, you too are speculating.  

That's all this is.  Mack trade didn't happen and because of that, we spent money in free agency and hit on our guys.  If we are speculating, we easily could have busted, too.  But we didn't.  And we used the draft picks nicely.  Unlike the Raiders, who did not.

The odd thing about the Mack trade is now that it is over, it can be talked about without speculating.  I think both teams lost in that won.  And that is weird to type.  LA whiffed on those picks and Mitch never got better.

Bears thought they were Mack away from the goal.

Rams thought they were Stafford away from the goal.

Bears were wrong, Rams were right.

 

[Packerraymond]

5 hours ago, packfanfb said:

Gute has shown you what a salary cap actually limits and what it doesn't. Ted didn't fail to acquire outside talent through trades because the "salary cap." His philosophy to roster building was night and day different than Wolf. 

As for Snead, simply pointing to the end result is a loser's argument, for both sides. Snead only has 1 SB, but 2 appearances. Thompson only had 1 appearance/win, Wolf had 2 appearances, and Gute so far is O-fer. Winning is hard anyways and things happen. I'm merely talking about a preference in terms of how I think a GM should run a team, depending on what stage or level that team is currently at talent-wise. Bad teams should not trade for expensive players (i.e. the Bears trading for Mack--that was dumb when you have Trubisky at QB). The Rams trading whatever they had to for Von Miller was smart. Doesn't have to be a big-time trade either. Just be willing to give up a damn 3rd-4th round pick every now and then.  

You realize Wolf was really one of the first true "draft and develop" guys? He put a premium on the QB position by aggressively pursuing Favre, TT got Rodgers with Favre still on the roster, Gute did the same thing with Love.

The biggest non-Favre trade was for Keith Jackson, that was a 2nd rounder. You didn't have the benefit of FA to build, if you needed a guy, you had to send another team a pick.

The only real difference was in season roster management. Wolf aggressively pursued veteran options if injuries withered his starters, but again he didn't have to worry about account for cap rollover and next seasons FAs until late in his career.

Wolf and Thompson are very similar, Gute is a more modern version of both.

[Sandy]

For those wondering, I looked through transactions dating back to 2008, so far there hasn't been a single trade in which we've given up more than a 6th rounder in value to aquire a player.

This to me is an extreme stance against trading draft picks, and I think that's why it's frustrating to see that other teams understand that you draft and develop as much as you can and then fill in the gaps with trades and signings. Gute signs free agents at a higher rate than Thompson ever did, which could work. Still, I wouldn't mind seeing us flip something for a player who could fill an immediate need.

[packfanfb]

13 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

We've got Aaron Donald's cap hit in Dead Cap this year. 

Thompson's issue with trades was never lost picks. It was always about the cap. 

You don't want Les Snead's team building style. You want Les Snead's team building style when it works. You sure as **** weren't here in 2016 advocating for Les Snead's style. 

In 2016 the Rams had Jared Goff at QB. So, you're correct, I wouldn't be pushing my chips all in with him at QB. 

[packfanfb]

10 hours ago, vegas492 said:

I wouldn't have done Miller either.

Ramsey, easy yes from me.

Stafford?  That was a tough one for me at the time.  It was a lot to give up for a QB who was aged and who had never tasted real success.  Obviously worked out for them.  Didn't look so good when he was on his pick 6 extravaganza.

Mack.  2018 trade, right?  

I was for trading for Mack.  And I'm not apologizing for that.  I felt at the time that Mack with Rodgers would have meant a Super Bowl title or two.  I don't think I was wrong for thinking that, because GB tried hard to pull that trade off, and the Raiders simply traded with the team that they thought would have the worse record and therefore the better picks.  (They were wrong.)

I've got no issues with the non-trade.  We did make out just fine.  But we still haven't won much in the postseason.  

We are set up for future success because of that non-trade.  Better than we would be if we had traded for him.  But I still feel like we'd have another shiny trophy had that trade happened.

Kind of like we will have to wait and see how these blockbuster trades and contracts age for the Rams and their roster.

I feel the same way about Mack. That's one where if you make the trade, you don't second guess it and applaud Gute for the aggressive move. At the same time, if you don't land him it's okay too especially when you turn around and aggressively pursue FAs instead (the Smiths). 

[vegas492]

On 6/24/2022 at 3:37 PM, Packerraymond said:

You realize Wolf was really one of the first true "draft and develop" guys? He put a premium on the QB position by aggressively pursuing Favre, TT got Rodgers with Favre still on the roster, Gute did the same thing with Love.

The biggest non-Favre trade was for Keith Jackson, that was a 2nd rounder. You didn't have the benefit of FA to build, if you needed a guy, you had to send another team a pick.

The only real difference was in season roster management. Wolf aggressively pursued veteran options if injuries withered his starters, but again he didn't have to worry about account for cap rollover and next seasons FAs until late in his career.

Wolf and Thompson are very similar, Gute is a more modern version of both.

I'm going from memory here.  I thought the Keith Jackson trade also brought us Mark Ingram.  For the second round pick.

And White was a free agent that signed in GB, right?  Keith Jackson was traded after we had White.  So there would have been FA to build a roster, right?

Not that it means much, but I thought Wolf was more of a wheeler and dealer than Ted.  Wolf did love his draft picks, but he also loved FA's, White, Dotson, Galbreath, Cox, Sean Jones, Mark Clayton, Rison (FA later in the year), Dez Howard, Beebe....etc.  He also traded for Jackson, Ingram, Robinson, Ahman Green.  (He also claimed the Gravedigger off of waiver from Minnesota, but he was a nobody when we got him.)

I think Wolf was amazing for his time.  He used everything to build a roster.  FA.  Draft.  Trade.

I know he liked Al Davis a lot.  And I think for giggles he and Al would basically swap 7'th round picks, just to do something late in the draft.

 

[Leader]

Green Bay Gazette -  Football fans will have a chance to purchase tickets for the Green Bay Packers game in London this week and again in July.

Green Bay Packers season ticket holders who opted-in for a drawing to be allowed to buy tickets will get their chance at 10 a.m. today. Those fans received a link on Monday to a Ticketmaster site where they can purchase tickets.

A season ticket package for two games at Tottenham Hotspur Stadium in London — the Oct. 9 game between the Packers and New York Giants and the Oct. 2 game between the Minnesota Vikings and New Orleans Saints — goes on sale at 4 a.m. Central Daylight Time Thursday. Season ticket prices range from $153 (£128) to $350 (£292).

Sale of the remaining single-game tickes will begin at 4 a.m. on July 26.

[Leader]

Dave Kluge -  Aaron Rodgers has a 32-0 TD-INT ratio on play-action calls over the last two years.

///

I've no idea if this is accurate...but it is interesting.

[Leader]

RichRymanPG -  Packers London tickets sold out fast this morning. In less than an hour.