AlexGreen#20 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, cannondale said: They thought he was worth less than a one year rental CB that's a head case because they swapped picks as well. And no QB controversy when they bring in their guy. And GB gets a lottery scratch off in Kizer I think Randall was even a bigger problem than we know or we would have just rode this thing out A one year rental at CB still probably gets you a 5th round comp pick. Additionally a one year rental at CB is really freaking important when you don't have 3 of the 4 pieces you need at CB right now. The issue is two fold: The decision to remove Randall when you need help at that position badly. I can understand this one if somebody tells me that Randall was leading a mutiny of younger players agaisnt the coaching staff. The return value got from trading Randall. I don't understand this one. Could have at least taken a 4th rounder from the Browns rather than screwing around with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtcheezwiz Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 I get we need more than two cornerbacks but you can draft depth and your 4th CB doesn't have to be a 1st round pick. I can understand being critical of the trade, but acting like we lost the iff aeaain because Randall won't be our #4 is crazy talk. If by April we are still looking at King and pipkins, then maybe you guys are right. But not necessarily as a pass rusher like wilkerson could help to improve the secondary as well, add in a first round CB and there could be a net gain, PLUS less ? Over back up QB. Let's take the magnifying glass off the cornerbacks for a second and consider the broader context of the off-season and success on defense. Especially considering the deep CB draft class and a decent FA class as well. You absolutely cannot judge this deal until we see what happens next. I like this deal because I think it shows they will make some moves at CB, if that doesn't happen ofc I will be pissed - but I am willing to wait and see and I'm not offended they didn't immediately make a deal for a CB just to settle my anxieties. I was skeptical there was a precedent for stockpiling CB's on Pettine's Defense ,as suggested we should do at various points in this thread, so I looked into it briefly. In 2010 the Jets has Revis, Cro, and 1st rounder Kyle Wilson as the #3. While it isn't quite the same as Randall at #4 it gives me credence to the stockpile mentality. But Wilson was a rookie, and Cro was of course brought over in FA. I think the Packers can still acquire two cornerbacks. Saying a 3rd round pick would be more helpful than Kizer sounds great until Rodgers gets hurt and we blame Gute for not doing anything to find a back up. It's a complicated case, lot of ins - lot of outs . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 13 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said: NOT BY TRADING THE BEST PLAYMAKER IN YOUR SECONDARY! Randall wasn't the best player in the secondary. If he is a problem in the locker room do we really want that kind of guy around? FA hasn't started yet and we still have the draft. Let's step away from the ledge here, gentlemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chili Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 39 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: I'm not contradicting you, just curious how we know we're getting Pick 101 for pick 114 rather than pick 123 for 133? Both are 4th round trade ups. Cleveland has two 4th rounders. It been confirmed that they used pick 123 for the Landry trade therefore we must have pick 101. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said: A one year rental at CB still probably gets you a 5th round comp pick. Additionally a one year rental at CB is really freaking important when you don't have 3 of the 4 pieces you need at CB right now. The issue is two fold: The decision to remove Randall when you need help at that position badly. I can understand this one if somebody tells me that Randall was leading a mutiny of younger players agaisnt the coaching staff. The return value got from trading Randall. I don't understand this one. Could have at least taken a 4th rounder from the Browns rather than screwing around with it. The trade does tell you Randall wasn't worth the risk / reward. The Peters and Talib deals tell you a 4th wasn't gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 5 minutes ago, Kenrik said: Sherman said Packers gave him a call and are interested. Derwin said packers talked to him about playing slot. House, Randall, King? Or Sherman, King, Derwin? So our 2nd and 4th CBs can be coming off Achillies tears? Pass on Sherman. That's not an injury people often recover from. Rollins has to be presumed dead in the same way. Regardless, you draft James and spend moderate money on Sherman, one of those sets of resources could have been spent improving the pass rush. Which we now no longer are going to be able to use our top pick on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, cannondale said: The trade does tell you Randall wasn't worth the risk / reward. The Peters and Talib deals tell you a 4th wasn't gonna happen. Talib is an old *** nut case with likely pending legal trouble, and Peters returned a 4th and a 2nd? Even if you say a 4th is greedy, a 5th is just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtcheezwiz Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, cannondale said: The trade does tell you Randall wasn't worth the risk / reward. The Peters and Talib deals tell you a 4th wasn't gonna happen. Money post. Also, ya it is kind of crazy to assume Randall's attitude did not factor into plans at all. All this talk about players not taking accountability and he is the off man out? There could be a link... But would be hard to prove. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Just now, Pugger said: Randall wasn't the best player in the secondary. If he is a problem in the locker room do we really want that kind of guy around? FA hasn't started yet and we still have the draft. Let's step away from the ledge here, gentlemen. Yes, I want that "problem" in the locker room. LITERALLY everybody here except for Incognito wanted Capers fired. LITERALLY everybody here praised Randall for calling into question the sense, or lack thereof, of our defense. Now he's gone and that behavior was a problem? We need a player like Randall on offense, too. Somebody to say that it sucks if it doesn't have the best QB in NFL history running it. If you don't have a dissenting voice in the locker room... Second point. Randall absolutely was our best cornerback. Out of all of them, Randall was the most versatile. He made the most plays. If everybody sucks, but one of them sucks and is also a playmaker that's versatile, that one sucks less than the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, Chili said: Cleveland has two 4th rounders. It been confirmed that they used pick 123 for the Landry trade therefore we must have pick 101. I'm seeing conflicting sources on which pick went where. It looks like you're right and I hope you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Moving up from the 14th pick in round 4 to the first pick in round 4 and the same for round five is how much in value? That's 35.5 points. The first pick in round five is at 36.5 in value. So unless the Browns had Kizer at less than 2 draft points in value, yeah, Randall got a 4th round pick in value. So... That's debunked. I wonder how many times we'll have to remind people of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Just now, AlexGreen#20 said: Talib is an old *** nut case with likely pending legal trouble, and Peters returned a 4th and a 2nd? Even if you say a 4th is greedy, a 5th is just fine. Sure - but we have a ton of picks already. Like I said, garbage in, garbage out. We basically got a scratch off to battle Hundley. And my very first thought was "guess we have to wait to draft an Edge yet again." Rodgers new deal should save us $20 million. Gute obviously has a plan, and it needs to be a good one. But for now it's just a wash IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantyWrestler Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 The main point we all need to realize is that the Packers really really wanted to get rid of Randal. We also weren’t very pleased with how Hundley has developed so we bought in a WB who’s value was low. I believe the kid was a rookie and he has the tools to be a good QB. Manning threw 28 int’s as a rookie too. More TD’s but arguably more talent at WR too. Lots more to come. I’m sure Gut isn’t sitting in his office right now saying “now what do we do?” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chili Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Packers get: QB DeShone Kizer 4th-round pick (4.1, 101st overall) 5th-round pick (5.1, 138th overall) Browns get: CB Damarious Randall 4th-round pick (4.14, 114th overall) 5th-round pick (5.13, 150th overall) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moose Posted March 10, 2018 Share Posted March 10, 2018 Now it makes sense for Packers to trade back in round 1 to get extra picks so they can get 2 CBs and a OLB in first couple rounds. Hopefully, one of the QBs falls to 14 and Buffalo is interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.