Rodgers Traded

[dsr]

I hope he passes his medical!

[Scott4Pack]

HERE is another perspective!
:-)

[wallyuwl]

Shocked Gute didn't get screwed. But this is about the minimum acceptable compensation. He will ruin it by trading up for a mediocre player.

[BF004]

Shocked Gute didn't get screwed. But this is about the minimum acceptable compensation. He will ruin it by trading up for a mediocre player.

Minimum acceptable, lol.

[wallyuwl]

HERE is another perspective!
:-)

A next year pick is usually considered a round lower than if had been this year. So nowhere close to #3 compensation.

[Foosball]

Thx #12 for all the memories. You did a marvellous job for us overall.

Yes, Thank you Aaron Rodgers (The Bear Killer). Now it’s time for the Jordan Love Era. Will the Packers hit on the Trifecta?

[YoHoChecko]

HERE is another perspective!
:-)

A next year pick is usually considered a round lower than if had been this year. So nowhere close to #3 compensation.

Agree with this; when you add it up and consider the conditional pick one round lower for the time difference, and split the difference for the condition (basically it's equally likely to be a high 2 or a low 1, so figure it as pick 32/33, then discount it one round, 64/65)

I did the math and it added up to being worth about pick 20
13 to 15 swap = 100 points
pick 42 = 480 points
pick 64 = 270 points
5th/6th pick swap = -14 points

Total: 836 points. Pick 20 is 850; pick 21 is 800

We were always looking for first round value. If that meant 13, if that meant two 2nds this year, or if it meant a 2nd this year and a future potential 1... it was all going to be similarish. First round value.

I'm sure someone with an interest in the newer charts will do the math their way, but I'd bet it would be in the teens or twenties that way, too.

This is the value we sought, and the value most of us seemed to expect. Some Packers fans went nuts with visions of Russell Wilson comp, but not many. Some Packers fans went safe and meek, insisting on all the possible downsides and talking about the money.

But by and large, here on the board, around Packers twitter, the random bits of reporting by guys with actual sources like Charles Robinson... the parameters were pretty close.

The end result landed on the side of the people who said the Packers had more, but not unlimited leverage in this deal. Almost everyone who said the Packers had the edge in leverage predicted a deal almost just like this.

On the safe saide, Ken Ingalls was wrong. Andy Herman was wrong (and has admitted it). Andrew Brandt was right.

But even people with vastly different opinions of Rodgers and Gutey, like me and Lupe, have been pretty well agreed that getting 13 somehow, getting a 2nd, and getting a conditional future pick was a good baseline. The conditional pick just looks to be a lot easier to make into a #1 than we predicted.

[YoHoChecko]

If Rodgers stays healthy we could have it all but locked down by week 12 or 13 that he hit his snaps. If he misses less than 5 games it's pretty likely. Hope we don't have to sweat it out.

[APB]

HERE is another perspective!
:-)

A next year pick is usually considered a round lower than if had been this year. So nowhere close to #3 compensation.

Agree with this...

Will ya’ll still feel like the delayed pick is discounted next year when the Packers have a second round 1 pick in what many already perceive to be a significantly stronger draft class?

[YoHoChecko]

Cynthia Freiland just came up with her own assessment of the value of the picks and says it's equivalent to pick 21.

However, she also thought getting Rodgers for "only" pick 21 is a win for the Jets. So weird dissonance on me listening to my NFL math crush.

[lupedafiasco]

A next year pick is usually considered a round lower than if had been this year. So nowhere close to #3 compensation.

Agree with this...

Will ya’ll still feel like the delayed pick is discounted next year when the Packers have a second round 1 pick in what many already perceive to be a significantly stronger draft class?

As my business 101 professor used to say. A dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow.

[lupedafiasco]

My main concern is in back to back seasons the two best players have demanded trades from this team citing its unhappiness with the management. Adams was out because they would give him a contract and rightfully so.

And yes we offered more than the Raiders in terms of total value but we never released the guaranteed money. That’s all that matter in these deals. We kept that hidden because it was probably a deal that didn’t protect Adams.

Rodgers left for various reasons but he demanded a trade multiple times from here. Now in the Adams deal you got terrific value I think. A 1 and a 2 for an aging WR is great even if he’s still in his prime. This trade, though good, still ultimately feels like we lost because Rodgers should have been traded last offseason. If we traded Adams, Rodgers needed to go too and we would have gotten a hell of a lot more than this.

[Foosball]

The only question left is the tweak to Rodgers' contract. Very curious to see what that looks like. May flip the script for a lot of people.

Yep, I believe they’re working on reducing the cap for both teams if possible. The Packers need to sign a veteran QB, a veteran WR, and Gute likes to sign a mid-level veteran backup tackle. The WR could come from a trade.

[YoHoChecko]

The only question left is the tweak to Rodgers' contract. Very curious to see what that looks like. May flip the script for a lot of people.

Yep, I believe they’re working on reducing the cap for both teams if possible. The Packers need to sign a veteran QB, a veteran WR, and Gute likes to sign a mid-level veteran backup tackle. The WR could come from a trade.

It's a technical thing. There's some rule about unrealized bonuses being billed in part to the team who the player began the league year with. It sounds dumb and complex and I'm probably not explaining it right, but basically, if he was traded as is, the Packers would have gotten an ADDITIONAL hit from the bonus option that has not yet been paid, so they're doing a quick change. He'll likely change it again when he arrives at the Jets and that may be more substantive but won't impact us.

So in short, it's going to look exactly like we've been expecting it to look for the Packers--$40M dead cap for Rodgers in 2023. Just like we've planned for.

[Foosball]

The only question left is the tweak to Rodgers' contract. Very curious to see what that looks like. May flip the script for a lot of people.

Yep, I believe they’re working on reducing the cap for both teams if possible. The Packers need to sign a veteran QB, a veteran WR, and Gute likes to sign a mid-level veteran backup tackle. The WR could come from a trade.

It's a technical thing. There's some rule about unrealized bonuses being billed in part to the team who the player began the league year with. It sounds dumb and complex and I'm probably not explaining it right, but basically, if he was traded as is, the Packers would have gotten an ADDITIONAL hit from the bonus option that has not yet been paid, so they're doing a quick change. He'll likely change it again when he arrives at the Jets and that may be more substantive but won't impact us.

So in short, it's going to look exactly like we've been expecting it to look for the Packers--$40M dead cap for Rodgers in 2023. Just like we've planned for.

Unless the Packers restructure Rodgers’ contract before the trade is implemented. A change that could help both teams’ cap.

[Labrev]

A top-32 pick at all is amazing for a middling player with only about two seasons left in the tank.

[BF004]

HERE is another perspective!
:-)

A next year pick is usually considered a round lower than if had been this year. So nowhere close to #3 compensation.

Agree with this; when you add it up and consider the conditional pick one round lower for the time difference, and split the difference for the condition (basically it's equally likely to be a high 2 or a low 1, so figure it as pick 32/33, then discount it one round, 64/65)

I did the math and it added up to being worth about pick 20
13 to 15 swap = 100 points
pick 42 = 480 points
pick 64 = 270 points
5th/6th pick swap = -14 points

Total: 836 points. Pick 20 is 850; pick 21 is 800

We were always looking for first round value. If that meant 13, if that meant two 2nds this year, or if it meant a 2nd this year and a future potential 1... it was all going to be similarish. First round value.

I'm sure someone with an interest in the newer charts will do the math their way, but I'd bet it would be in the teens or twenties that way, too.

This is the value we sought, and the value most of us seemed to expect. Some Packers fans went nuts with visions of Russell Wilson comp, but not many. Some Packers fans went safe and meek, insisting on all the possible downsides and talking about the money.

But by and large, here on the board, around Packers twitter, the random bits of reporting by guys with actual sources like Charles Robinson... the parameters were pretty close.

The end result landed on the side of the people who said the Packers had more, but not unlimited leverage in this deal. Almost everyone who said the Packers had the edge in leverage predicted a deal almost just like this.

On the safe saide, Ken Ingalls was wrong. Andy Herman was wrong (and has admitted it). Andrew Brandt was right.

But even people with vastly different opinions of Rodgers and Gutey, like me and Lupe, have been pretty well agreed that getting 13 somehow, getting a 2nd, and getting a conditional future pick was a good baseline. The conditional pick just looks to be a lot easier to make into a #1 than we predicted.

I think 64 is a bit conservative for what is a likely first rounder.

I got 7th overall on my tvc.

[Drj820]

Shocked Gute didn't get screwed. But this is about the minimum acceptable compensation. He will ruin it by trading up for a mediocre player.

Minimum acceptable, lol.

The bloggers can’t help themselves

[Pckfn23]

Aaron Rodgers trade grades: Did Jets or Packers win the deal?
5:03 PM CT
Seth Walder
ESPN Analytics
It finally happened: The New York Jets traded for Aaron Rodgers.

It's a move that seemed inevitable for weeks, and now that it's done and the compensation is known, should the Jets have traded for the four-time MVP? Should the Green Bay Packers have dealt him?

Let's break down the deal from all angles, from where this puts the Jets in the AFC to whether the draft compensation and financial burden ($59.5 million for the 2023 season) are worth it. Let's dive into this blockbuster, franchise-altering move for both teams.

Packers trade QB Rodgers to Jets
Jets get: QB Aaron Rodgers, 2023 first-round pick (No. 15), 2023 fifth-round pick (No. 170)
Packers get: 2023 first-round pick (No. 13), 2023 second-round pick (No. 42), 2023 sixth-round pick (No. 207), 2024 conditional second-round pick that becomes a first-rounder if Rodgers plays 65% of snaps in 2023.

There are real, serious risks here. The Jets just traded major draft capital for the right to pay at least $59.5 million for a 39-year-old quarterback who had worn out his welcome in Green Bay and is coming off the worst season of his career. How can that not be risky?

But the point of the game is to win the Super Bowl. Despite a good roster, winning the Super Bowl in 2023 was not a realistic aspiration for the Jets prior to acquiring Rodgers. Now it is.

In Rodgers, the Jets land one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, but also a player who is coming off a season with a 39.3 QBR, which put him between Matt Ryan and Russell Wilson -- awfully poor company in 2022 -- in the metric's rankings. Perhaps Rodgers' play was a one-year blip partially fueled by the Packers' stubborn years-long lack of investment in the receiving game (Christian Watson's second-half-of-the-season breakout notwithstanding), or perhaps it was just the beginning of a major decline. It's not unreasonable to think Rodgers has another year or two of strong play left in him, but it's far from a guarantee. That's the bet the Jets are making.

The possibility of Rodgers playing at a 2020 or 2021 level means the Jets do have Super Bowl upside, though they are not the best team in their own division (behind the Buffalo Bills) and still are presumably underdogs to the Kansas City Chiefs and Cincinnati Bengals in the AFC, too.

The reason this deal can happen at all is because the Packers elected to go with another former first-round pick at quarterback in Jordan Love. As odd as it seems to want to move on from a Hall of Fame quarterback, if they believe Love has a real chance to turn into a franchise quarterback, then it's reasonable to cash in -- both in terms of draft capital and money saved -- on Rodgers off his worst season while they still can.

But now to the compensation, because the negotiation here was interesting. The Jets, in some ways, lacked leverage because they badly wanted Rodgers. But contrary to the way they handled this negotiation, the Jets did have other options.

They could have gone after nonexclusively franchise-tagged Lamar Jackson, for example. Jimmy Garoppolo was available for cheap in free agency. Ryan Tannehill, Kirk Cousins and Trey Lance all might have been available in the trade market. They also sat at pick No. 13 in the draft -- within striking range for a rookie QB. None of those were guaranteed acquisitions and none would have offered the immediate upside Rodgers does, though some would have been cheaper to acquire.

The Packers really did lack leverage, though. Once they decided to move on from Rodgers, they needed to move on from him. Rodgers is guaranteed $59.5 million for playing in 2023, and if he wasn't going to be the Packers' quarterback, they had to get that money off their books. The only way the Packers could generate leverage would be a second interested team, but that never seemed to materialize.

Despite that, the Packers were able to extract major assets from the Jets. Even if we assume the 2024 selection in this trade is a mid-second-round pick, by our AV-based draft value chart, the Packers traded Rodgers for something like the equivalent of a No. 10 overall pick (if we don't discount future year selections). In all likelihood, though, that 2024 pick will become a first-round selection, making this trade even more valuable for Green Bay.

Think about it this way. In a vacuum, Rodgers doesn't offer substantial surplus value over his contract because he's already paid at the peak of the quarterback market. In theory, that means he should be worth little in terms of draft capital. It made sense the Jets would still be willing to give up something to acquire him because of the circumstances. (He was probably the best player available and it gave them Super Bowl aspirations.) But the Jets didn't give up just something -- they dealt major trade compensation.

We'll never know, but it's hard not to think that had the Jets seriously explored other options and/or waited the Packers out that they could have brought the price down.

In addition, the deal doesn't appear to offer retirement protections for the Jets. This is an oversimplification, but the Jets very conceivably might be paying a second-round pick (in 2023), a first-round pick (in 2024) and $59.5 million in exchange for one year of Aaron Rodgers.

That is a lot.

The Jets have a good roster. But it's not that good that they should make this kind of investment in what might be a one-year gamble.

Trading for Rodgers was a fine plan. But the Jets gave up too much.


Jets' grade: C
Packers' grade: A-

[APB]

The only question left is the tweak to Rodgers' contract. Very curious to see what that looks like. May flip the script for a lot of people.

Yep, I believe they’re working on reducing the cap for both teams if possible. The Packers need to sign a veteran QB, a veteran WR, and Gute likes to sign a mid-level veteran backup tackle. The WR could come from a trade.

It's a technical thing. There's some rule about unrealized bonuses being billed in part to the team who the player began the league year with. It sounds dumb and complex and I'm probably not explaining it right, but basically, if he was traded as is, the Packers would have gotten an ADDITIONAL hit from the bonus option that has not yet been paid, so they're doing a quick change. He'll likely change it again when he arrives at the Jets and that may be more substantive but won't impact us.

So in short, it's going to look exactly like we've been expecting it to look for the Packers--$40M dead cap for Rodgers in 2023. Just like we've planned for.