Packers Huddle

Drj820 wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 20:11

BSA wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 20:08

go pak go wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 19:02

So are you saying you have inside information or are you saying you are implying based on your voracious reading?

both -
Take it for what its worth to you - some random dude said some stuff on Packers Huddle. I believe it to be true; because I know these guys and have had many conversations over the years. One of them told me about the D. Adams trade a full month before it went public.
I told him he was full of &%$@. Apparently, he wasn't. But you don't know me and you really have no reason to believe me.

Who knows, maybe I'm just be trying to act cool & connected on the internet.

Sorry. I’m sure you may have connections, but you have failed to absolve Gutey from judgement for holding on to rodgers a year to long and tanking his trade value

why would he do that, you keep wanting to call everyone scared to move on from Rodgers last year, when Rodgers was coming off a MVP season and we where trying to win a SB, and it's only with hind sight that your upset about the contract, I'am so tired of hearing you and other cry about a contract you didn't complain about when it was given, every team in the league would have done the same thing.

bud fox wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 20:56

Yeah seems like it however it is weird you wouldn't want all possible ammo at the beginning of the draft in case you wanted to move up.

I guess only move up that will be considered will be 13.

Giving picks to trade up in a class with very little in the way of elite players for a team that is transitioning to a new QB and has a handful of roster holes to fill would be general management malpractice. Just a stupid, terrible idea that I hope we don't have any interest in.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 21:11

bud fox wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 20:56

Yeah seems like it however it is weird you wouldn't want all possible ammo at the beginning of the draft in case you wanted to move up.

I guess only move up that will be considered will be 13.

Giving picks to trade up in a class with very little in the way of elite players for a team that is transitioning to a new QB and has a handful of roster holes to fill would be general management malpractice. Just a stupid, terrible idea that I hope we don't have any interest in.

I think that is a little strong but yes based on this year's talent there won't be much reason to trade up.

Yoop wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 21:07

Drj820 wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 20:11

BSA wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 20:08

both -
Take it for what its worth to you - some random dude said some stuff on Packers Huddle. I believe it to be true; because I know these guys and have had many conversations over the years. One of them told me about the D. Adams trade a full month before it went public.
I told him he was full of &%$@. Apparently, he wasn't. But you don't know me and you really have no reason to believe me.

Who knows, maybe I'm just be trying to act cool & connected on the internet.

Sorry. I’m sure you may have connections, but you have failed to absolve Gutey from judgement for holding on to rodgers a year to long and tanking his trade value

why would he do that, you keep wanting to call everyone scared to move on from Rodgers last year, when Rodgers was coming off a MVP season and we where trying to win a SB, and it's only with hind sight that your upset about the contract, I'am so tired of hearing you and other cry about a contract you didn't complain about when it was given, every team in the league would have done the same thing.

I’m going to assume you didn’t read the posts relevant to this discussion. We are talking about whether gute had a trade lined up that Murphy vetoed or not.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 21:44

Yoop wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 21:07

Drj820 wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 20:11

Sorry. I’m sure you may have connections, but you have failed to absolve Gutey from judgement for holding on to rodgers a year to long and tanking his trade value

why would he do that, you keep wanting to call everyone scared to move on from Rodgers last year, when Rodgers was coming off a MVP season and we where trying to win a SB, and it's only with hind sight that your upset about the contract, I'am so tired of hearing you and other cry about a contract you didn't complain about when it was given, every team in the league would have done the same thing.

I’m going to assume you didn’t read the posts relevant to this discussion. We are talking about whether gute had a trade lined up that Murphy vetoed or not.

There is some rumor piece about Murphy nixing a trade this year and that Gute would have done it weeks ago if he hadn't.

I don't believe Murphy has nixed a trade this year or last year. There is no way they were trading a MVP last year and Murphy can't do anything more to get more value from the Jets this year.

The article about Murphy doing this was so stupid - said his comment was "do you like your job?" - it seemed to have been written by someone who has never heard or seen Murphy before.

bud fox wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 21:21

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 21:11

bud fox wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 20:56

Yeah seems like it however it is weird you wouldn't want all possible ammo at the beginning of the draft in case you wanted to move up.

I guess only move up that will be considered will be 13.

Giving picks to trade up in a class with very little in the way of elite players for a team that is transitioning to a new QB and has a handful of roster holes to fill would be general management malpractice. Just a stupid, terrible idea that I hope we don't have any interest in.

I think that is a little strong but yes based on this year's talent there won't be much reason to trade up.

It's one thing to say this draft class isn't particularly strong, but another to imply that there is no one that would be worth moving up for. Both teams have different needs, it isn't preposterous to think there are multiple offers on the table from the jets, with the idea that GB will execute one or other based on how the board falls, or the Jets would potentially pull one of them if say Skorownski is there and they want him. All speculation right now.

Madcity_matt wrote: ↑

11 Apr 2023 09:11

It's one thing to say this draft class isn't particularly strong, but another to imply that there is no one that would be worth moving up for.

Sure, my wording was strong. And multiple offers where the picks we gain are affected whether or not we get to pick at 13 or 15 is different than giving up picks we have....

...but yes, I feel that full stop trading up beyond that scenario would be absurd for our situation particularly in this draft class. Both things matter; that the 15th best player and the 40th best player are closer in quality this year than in many years; and that the team is in a position where adding more quality players matters a lot more than adding a slightly higher-quality player.

If we give up picks to trade up, I will rage on draft night and the following week about what a dumb move it was (and then quickly move on because in the grand scheme, who cares). It would be a terrible, terrible move. Not even JSN would justify giving up a top-100 pick to move up for, regardless of how perfect the fit is.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

11 Apr 2023 09:19

Madcity_matt wrote: ↑

11 Apr 2023 09:11

It's one thing to say this draft class isn't particularly strong, but another to imply that there is no one that would be worth moving up for.

Sure, my wording was strong. And multiple offers where the picks we gain are affected whether or not we get to pick at 13 or 15 is different than giving up picks we have....

...but yes, I feel that full stop trading up beyond that scenario would be absurd for our situation particularly in this draft class. Both things matter; that the 15th best player and the 40th best player are closer in quality this year than in many years; and that the team is in a position where adding more quality players matters a lot more than adding a slightly higher-quality player.

If we give up picks to trade up, I will rage on draft night and the following week about what a dumb move it was (and then quickly move on because in the grand scheme, who cares). It would be a terrible, terrible move. Not even JSN would justify giving up a top-100 pick to move up for, regardless of how perfect the fit is.

If there are multiple scenarios, the good news is we will likely never know what the alternate was.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

11 Apr 2023 09:19

Madcity_matt wrote: ↑

11 Apr 2023 09:11

It's one thing to say this draft class isn't particularly strong, but another to imply that there is no one that would be worth moving up for.

Sure, my wording was strong. And multiple offers where the picks we gain are affected whether or not we get to pick at 13 or 15 is different than giving up picks we have....

...but yes, I feel that full stop trading up beyond that scenario would be absurd for our situation particularly in this draft class. Both things matter; that the 15th best player and the 40th best player are closer in quality this year than in many years; and that the team is in a position where adding more quality players matters a lot more than adding a slightly higher-quality player.

If we give up picks to trade up, I will rage on draft night and the following week about what a dumb move it was (and then quickly move on because in the grand scheme, who cares). It would be a terrible, terrible move. Not even JSN would justify giving up a top-100 pick to move up for, regardless of how perfect the fit is.

I know with a new QB we seem to be a transitioning team, I don't see our situation in that light at all, I really do believe that Love is ahead of where Rodgers was after 3 seasons, for one, imo he has had better coaching, and a more stable QB ahead of him, I think we saw that with last seasons small sample, sure LOve could bomb, many do, but imo he will be good enough and mistake free that we should expect a PO birth.

I would have no problem trading up for Njikba, Wilson, with in reason of course, we have a need for what both will bring this season, and as is well known I'am a instant gratification drafter

Madcity_matt wrote: ↑

11 Apr 2023 09:23

If there are multiple scenarios, the good news is we will likely never know what the alternate was.

And just to clarify; I would not be mad if the Rodgers trade includes a 13/15 pick swap. I WOULD be mad if we spend additional draft capital moving up in some other way.

Obviously, a pick swap comes at the expense of additional draft capital from the Jets, in ways we would never know; and maybe I'm suffering from the flawed logic of the endowment effect here (valuing things you have more because you have them) in saying I wouldn't want to give up a pick to move up, but I'm fine with passing up a hypothetical pick from the Jets that would come in an alternate trade scenario...

but I do think that's a different animal; precisely because the alternate scenario can only exist hypothetically in an alternate reality rather than a pick that actually exists in the current reality being traded away.

This is word salad, but anyway; I'm fine with a 13/15 pick swap in the Rodgers deal (which is incidentally worth an early 4th, basically). I'm not fine with giving up a top 100 pick to move further up in the first round for a prospect in a draft when we need a few early hits.

Yoop wrote: ↑

11 Apr 2023 09:39

I would have no problem trading up for Njikba, Wilson, with in reason of course, we have a need for what both will bring this season, and as is well known I'am a instant gratification drafter

Yes, you are.

I am specifically criticizing the "instant gratification" mentality of trade ups. Statistically, trade ups are a massive risk; they don't pay off analytically, on average, even though there are plenty of individual examples of them working out.

But they make more sense when you have a team that you think has one specific need more than any other need. I don't believe in "a player away" mentality, but I do understand "a specific glaring hole" mentality.

We have multiple specific glaring holes. We need picks to address lots of them. We need a TE, a S, a DL, a WR, and probably a RT. We don't need them all in this draft. We don't need them all in the first two rounds. But with so many needs where a player might become a starter, you don't sacrifice premium picks to focus in on one narrow position/player

for years the packers have needed more fire power at WR and they have refused to trade up to get true fire power.

They may throw away a 4th rounder away to move up in the 2nd or something, but I highly doubt they give much away to move up beyond 15 or 13.

Just not the Packers style.

A) I think at this point, it doesn’t make sense to do the trade until the draft if one or both teams are wanting to see how the board falls.

B) That tells me 13 is still totally in play in some capacity or there isn’t a real reason to wait.


Could be one of, or both, jets want to see the board, if Paris Johnson or Broderick Jones are there, Jets say we want the pick, you can have the other package we offered, whatever that may be.

Also could be Packers want a few guys and if they aren’t there, then they say ok, we don’t really want 13 after all, we’ll take the 42 and and pick next year, or whatever.

I'm seeing more talking heads in sports media saying that a Rodgers trade might make the most sense on Draft Day.

'Really feels like a narrative planted by GB and/or NYJ.

Rodgers would love to be the attention of all of draft night

bud fox wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 21:21

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 21:11

bud fox wrote: ↑

10 Apr 2023 20:56

Yeah seems like it however it is weird you wouldn't want all possible ammo at the beginning of the draft in case you wanted to move up.

I guess only move up that will be considered will be 13.

Giving picks to trade up in a class with very little in the way of elite players for a team that is transitioning to a new QB and has a handful of roster holes to fill would be general management malpractice. Just a stupid, terrible idea that I hope we don't have any interest in.

I think that is a little strong but yes based on this year's talent there won't be much reason to trade up.

In fact, “Guty gravity” probably means to pull more toward trading back. I know many in PackerNation would cringe at that. But it needs to be considered. There aren’t the WRs in round 1, aside from JSN, that we want. Those are available later. Guty likely won’t pick a TE in round 1, as some nice ones are there to be had later as well. There are more than a few OLinemen, Edge, and others available. So there isn’t a rush to consume 15 if some good gain is to be had.

Yeah, I’m bracing myself for JSN or a trade back.
:-)

Labrev wrote: ↑

11 Apr 2023 10:47

I'm seeing more talking heads in sports media saying that a Rodgers trade might make the most sense on Draft Day.

'Really feels like a narrative planted by GB and/or NYJ.

Whatever it is, that “spin” is making the rounds. It’s amazing how one person “breaks” a story like that and then it seems like the entire sports world is repeating it. Color me not impressed with the reporting. THey’d rather repeat rumors than make real stories.

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

11 Apr 2023 12:40

In fact, “Guty gravity” probably means to pull more toward trading back. I know many in PackerNation would cringe at that. But it needs to be considered. There aren’t the WRs in round 1, aside from JSN, that we want. Those are available later. Guty likely won’t pick a TE in round 1, as some nice ones are there to be had later as well. There are more than a few OLinemen, Edge, and others available. So there isn’t a rush to consume 15 if some good gain is to be had.

Yeah, I’m bracing myself for JSN or a trade back.
:-)

I could also see a scenario where they have a guy or two they really like but think they can get value; don't love the trade back options, sit tight and take their guy (like Quay Walker last year) and the general fanbase and media are like "what a reach!"

Darnell Wright, Brian Breese, Myles Murphy, gosh maybe an Anton Harrison though that would irritate me more than the others.

Just remember that there is FAR less consensus across team draft boards than there is across media draft boards. Surprises happen every year. They don't seem to work out any more or less frequently than they don't.

Except Creed Humphrey and Josh Myers. That one was just obvious

Yeah, f them, I just hold.

We look stupid, but our brass all in it together and their future tied to Love, not this trade. After three 13 win seasons, they are safe for a bit and it’s all about if Love is good or bad.

Saleh and Douglas are legit gone if this falls through. They lost their last 7 of 8, dicked with their cap, and honestly didn’t get any better this offseason. There is no way you can throw out Wilson after this offseason, it would be a total joke. He, nor that locker room, and clearly the FO couldn’t have any faith in him.

I’m okay with two 2nds, so I’d be thrilled if the Jets give this to GB.