Packers Huddle

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2023 12:25

paco wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2023 11:39

Doesn't appear he was happy with the Jets roster (and staff) either. 8 former Packers including Hackett.

I wonder if there is even one other team in history that acquired EIGHT players/coaches from a single team in one year. Unreal.

Because that 65 percent mark cannot be calculated until the end of the regular season, the Jets do not have the freedom to use either draft pick at the trade deadline without first coming to a new agreement with the Packers. This was confirmed to me by league sources, who said that a similar issue over conditional draft picks was a factor at the trade deadline last year for at least one proposed trade elsewhere in the NFL.

According to a source, the NFL’s stance on these conditional selections is similar to the NBA’s, where one team cannot unilaterally choose to give up the higher-valued option in an effort to close the book on a trade.

After talking to people in the know, here’s a rundown of one hypothetical that could play out at the trade deadline this year:

1. The Jets identify a pass-catcher that Rodgers wants to go after. Let’s call him Avante Dadams. Dadams’ original team wants at least a second-round pick in exchange for the receiver’s remaining contract.
2.The Jets go to the Packers with an offer: New York will give Green Bay their first-round pick in 2024, straight up, for the freedom to use their 2024 second-rounder in a trade for Dadams.
3.Assuming that Rodgers has started every game for the Jets at this point, 7 of the team’s 17 games will be in the books — meaning that Rodgers should have played around 42 percent of the Jets’ projected season-long offensive snaps. At that point, which is the bigger gamble for Green Bay? Is it assuming the risk that Rodgers won’t play at least 4 more games in the remaining 10 weeks of the regular season or is it voluntarily allowing a team whose first-round draft pick that they’ll likely own get better? Based on conversations I’ve had, I would guess that Green Bay would turn down this offer.
4. The Jets then make a counteroffer, adding another draft choice (maybe a 2024 fourth-round pick) to the mix on top of conceding their 2024 first-round pick. That is something that might interest the team enough to be able to get the Packers to agree to new terms.

The Jets’ and Packers’ relationship, brought together by Rodgers, is the gift that keeps on giving. Keep an eye out for this story popping up again around October 31st, which is when all league-wide trading will come to an end at 4 p.m. Eastern. If Rodgers’ Jets really do want to take a big swing at the trade deadline, they’re going to have to come back to the table with Green Bay general manager Brian Gutekunst.

BF004 wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 07:40

It might not be in our best interest to just accept the 1st and make the Jets better, moving our pick from maybe like 24 to 30.

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 13:22

Random reminder that people in this forum unironically claimed that the Packers had "no leverage" in trading Rodgers. That was funny.

BSA wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 13:13

BF004 wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 07:40

It might not be in our best interest to just accept the 1st and make the Jets better, moving our pick from maybe like 24 to 30.

I'd take the 1st, but with a sweetener because they are over a barrel.
The 24 vs 30 stuff is just too unpredictable (24-30 are playoff teams) and getting an extra 5th to consummate the deal should help soothe the draftniks.

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 13:22

Random reminder that people in this forum unironically claimed that the Packers had "no leverage" in trading Rodgers. That was funny.

Yoop wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 16:32

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 13:22

Random reminder that people in this forum unironically claimed that the Packers had "no leverage" in trading Rodgers. That was funny.

well, remind me again of what we have gotten? the market for Rodgers shriveled to basically one team, so there was no bidding war.

we flipped first rounders, which was not a lot, 2 slots, and a conditional 1st in 2024, and dumped his dead money, or a lot of it, Am I missing some other draft picks?

Yoop wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 16:32

Labrev wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 13:22

Random reminder that people in this forum unironically claimed that the Packers had "no leverage" in trading Rodgers. That was funny.

well, remind me again of what we have gotten? the market for Rodgers shriveled to basically one team, so there was no bidding war.

we flipped first rounders, which was not a lot, 2 slots, and a conditional 1st in 2024, and dumped his dead money, or a lot of it, Am I missing some other draft picks?

NCF wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 13:54

BSA wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 13:13

BF004 wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 07:40

It might not be in our best interest to just accept the 1st and make the Jets better, moving our pick from maybe like 24 to 30.

I'd take the 1st, but with a sweetener because they are over a barrel.
The 24 vs 30 stuff is just too unpredictable (24-30 are playoff teams) and getting an extra 5th to consummate the deal should help soothe the draftniks.

A pick is a pick, but I would hold out for more. Especially if the Jets think the cost is small and then find a deal they want, the pressure to get that thing done from their end could be a pretty big deal. Frankly, I would think about trying to leverage a second high pick in 2024 or 2025.

Yoop wrote: ↑

02 Aug 2023 16:32

well, remind me again of what we have gotten? the market for Rodgers shriveled to basically one team, so there was no bidding war.

we flipped first rounders, which was not a lot, 2 slots, and a conditional 1st in 2024, and dumped his dead money, or a lot of it, Am I missing some other draft picks?