Packers Huddle

Drj820 wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 07:18

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 06:54

Rasul is a starting quality CB. That is worth a lot more than a 3rd round pick. Yes, he is older than ideal but he does not have a lot of wear on the tires. A player that sits on the PS or bench for several years has very little accumulated injuries and that is more significant than calendar years. Rasul is good for a minimum of 4 years as a starter if he does not have significant injuries in those 4 years.

So, yes, trading him for only a third is very definitely tanking. His level of play and his position means his value was a high 2nd round pick.

If he’s worth more than a three, trading him does not indicate tanking (because we would have traded others), it indicates gute didn’t like him calling out the offense.

proper compensation for a player like Sul, would have been a surplus positional player from the other team with equal talent level, trading studs for draft picks is a big gamble, the odds of the pick being good are terrible

I also find Gutes comments that “a three plus we give up a 5” is something that was “too hard to refuse” is a little laughable.

Maybe if they offered a 2. Not a very late 3.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 07:43

I also find Gutes comments that “a three plus we give up a 5” is something that was “too hard to refuse” is a little laughable.

Maybe if they offered a 2. Not a very late 3.

I think you, I, some others nailed this for just what it was, Guty got rid of a malcontent, Sul called out the leadership, and the main leader didn't like it, at least thats how it smells to me

I hope it was a wake up call

Taking a three for a player is a team wanting to get a player from you.

You paying a 5 to make it work is you wanting to get rid of the player

Drj820 wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 08:08

Taking a three for a player is a team wanting to get a player from you.

You paying a 5 to make it work is you wanting to get rid of the player

GM's do each other favors though, just to look at both sides of this we can't over look that, the Bills could return this favor at a later date.

I know thats possibly to gray a area to get into, but I believe it happens, I think Yoho and some others even mentioned this stuff years back, (Palmy)

that may also explain two other sweet heart deals we saw near the trade dead line with the edge rushers.

the GM fraternity has cliches just like any other organization, they include groups of GM's that are more friendly to some then others, why wouldn't they do small favors and help each other at times like this, we can't win it all, but the Bills could, or at least have a chance,

whatever it still sucks to me.

It’s amazing to me how that R5 pick has got so many people in a tizzy.

In any other scenario, a R5 pick wouldn’t even be worth the effort to type out a post. A pick that late is basically a guess. Some turn out, most don’t.

But in this case, the give back of the R5 pick is an indictment on Rasul, the FO, and proof the tank is on.

APB wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 08:59

It’s amazing to me how that R5 pick has got so many people in a tizzy.

In any other scenario, a R5 pick wouldn’t even be worth the effort to type out a post. A pick that late is basically a guess. Some turn out, most don’t.

But in this case, the give back of the R5 pick is an indictment on Rasul, the FO, and proof the tank is on.

same could be said about 3rd rounder for our GM, thats why when he commented about a 3rd giving us some ammo, or said it was to hard to pass up, I laughed

there is no way I would ever consider that any where close to equal value.

APB wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 08:59

It’s amazing to me how that R5 pick has got so many people in a tizzy.

In any other scenario, a R5 pick wouldn’t even be worth the effort to type out a post. A pick that late is basically a guess. Some turn out, most don’t.

But in this case, the give back of the R5 pick is an indictment on Rasul, the FO, and proof the tank is on.

Yeah the 5th round pick argument is dumb.

It’s definitely soft tanking. There’s no way the team playing tomorrow is better without Douglas. That said you have Alexander long term. Stokes you would hope develops and plays long term. You have Valentine that the team likes. I know he got pan fried noodles against the Broncos but he’s just a rookie at CB. That’s 3 boundary players and then Douglas. He was redundant and you got compensation for him higher than what you would get from a compensatory pick.

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 09:43

APB wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 08:59

It’s amazing to me how that R5 pick has got so many people in a tizzy.

In any other scenario, a R5 pick wouldn’t even be worth the effort to type out a post. A pick that late is basically a guess. Some turn out, most don’t.

But in this case, the give back of the R5 pick is an indictment on Rasul, the FO, and proof the tank is on.

same could be said about 3rd rounder for our GM, thats why when he commented about a 3rd giving us some ammo, or said it was to hard to pass up, I laughed

there is no way I would ever consider that any where close to equal value.

To me we got more back for Douglas than he was worth. I thought it was a masterful steal by Gute. I hate him as a GM but you have to call things the way you see it.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 09:45

APB wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 08:59

It’s amazing to me how that R5 pick has got so many people in a tizzy.

In any other scenario, a R5 pick wouldn’t even be worth the effort to type out a post. A pick that late is basically a guess. Some turn out, most don’t.

But in this case, the give back of the R5 pick is an indictment on Rasul, the FO, and proof the tank is on.

Yeah the 5th round pick argument is dumb.

It’s definitely soft tanking. There’s no way the team playing tomorrow is better without Douglas. That said you have Alexander long term. Stokes you would hope develops and plays long term. You have Valentine that the team likes. I know he got pan fried noodles against the Broncos but he’s just a rookie at CB. That’s 3 boundary players and then Douglas. He was redundant and you got compensation for him higher than what you would get from a compensatory pick.

Douglas could replace any safety we have outside of possibly Savage, Nixon fo sure at slot as well,

and he will outplay in the next 4 years any 3rd round pick we will get for him.

he was a malcontent, so they peddled him

at Lupe: It’s definitely soft tanking.

and now your saying Guty did this to make it harder for us to win games, I guess to get low enough draft status to replace Love should he continue to suck, those are the wishes FANS make, no GM would quit on a QB who's failures are the result of failures from his supporting cast.

a quality receiver would have caught more of the receptions our receivers failed to make a week ago, and most of this season.

your to quick to throw in the towel and start over Lupe, just as your a ultra tough grader of talent, when you measure everything based on perfect, and expect that result, ya have to expect disappointment, the average hit rate for draft picks is lousy, 3 out of 7 hits is considered a successful draft, it could take 10 seasons to ever find a 3rd round pick as good as Sully.
everyone has a right to there opinions

Drj820 wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 07:18

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 06:54

Rasul is a starting quality CB. That is worth a lot more than a 3rd round pick. Yes, he is older than ideal but he does not have a lot of wear on the tires. A player that sits on the PS or bench for several years has very little accumulated injuries and that is more significant than calendar years. Rasul is good for a minimum of 4 years as a starter if he does not have significant injuries in those 4 years.

So, yes, trading him for only a third is very definitely tanking. His level of play and his position means his value was a high 2nd round pick.

If he’s worth more than a three, trading him does not indicate tanking (because we would have traded others), it indicates gute didn’t like him calling out the offense.

If that is why Gute traded him, then Gute is a petty tyrant. The O deserved to be called out.

I just think fans can’t comprehend how bad this team really is and how long this rebuild is about to take.

Shout out Paul Brett laying out the facts I’ve been presenting for what feels like years now. The 2020 and 2021 drafts were so bad. We have 9 players currently in the roster from both drafts and of those 9, 4 are starters. That’s Runyan, Myers, Stokes, and Love.

As of right now they’re all bad players and those are supposed to be your veterans right now.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 11:36

I just think fans can’t comprehend how bad this team really is and how long this rebuild is about to take.

Shout out Paul Brett laying out the facts I’ve been presenting for what feels like years now. The 2020 and 2021 drafts were so bad. We have 9 players currently in the roster from both drafts and of those 9, 4 are starters. That’s Runyan, Myers, Stokes, and Love.

As of right now they’re all bad players and those are supposed to be your veterans right now.

and you want to dump the best we have expecting this GM to do better, thing is it's very doubtful he will be replaced, and as you and this guy Paul Brett point out his drafting prowess is questionable, so it actually makes more sense to just fill some of the weaker positions and keep trudging along

and this team isn't as void of talent as you propose, your over looking the puppy affect as though there bound not to improve, same with Love, everything we are seeing from him is improvable, deep ball accuracy, touch on short passes, decision making, dealing with pressure, everything, will it ever be good enough, well thats the million dollar question, but under the conditions he's had to play under so far, no one can say, I think your jumping the gun here a bit.

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 09:53

Douglas could replace any safety we have outside of possibly Savage, Nixon fo sure at slot as well,

What are you basing that on?

Would Douglas even want to play safety? Remember, Charles Woodson kind of sucked when he was first moved to safety. He didn't embrace it until he went back to Oakland. A good corner doesn't automatically make a good safety.

And they already tried Douglas at slot, with Jaire and Stokes outside, and he was not good. He's got the wrong skill set; he's not a quick or fast guy, he's a technician.

Oh I 100% expect Gute to do a bad job with the rebuild because he’s proven to be a very bad GM. If there’s anything we have learned from this org is they’ll be reactive and probably give him 1 more year.

I see no possible scenario in which Mark Murphy fires GM Brian Gutekunst in 2024, because it is Murphy's final year with the team.

I could maybe see LaFleur getting fired if it continues to look as bad on the field as it has the past 4 games, but that is yet to be determined, and I would not be in favor of Murphy hiring a new head coach on his way out the door.

My biggest fear is that we are going to go into 2024 with a lame duck President and wait until whomever succeeds Murphy in 2025 to make decisions on the futures of the GM and head coach, even if we have another season like this one in 2024.

Just seems to be a lot of uncertainty throughout the organization right now.

Crazylegs Starks wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 12:13

Yoop wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 09:53

Douglas could replace any safety we have outside of possibly Savage, Nixon fo sure at slot as well,

What are you basing that on?

Would Douglas even want to play safety? Remember, Charles Woodson kind of sucked when he was first moved to safety. He didn't embrace it until he went back to Oakland. A good corner doesn't automatically make a good safety.

And they already tried Douglas at slot, with Jaire and Stokes outside, and he was not good. He's got the wrong skill set; he's not a quick or fast guy, he's a technician.

I think your basing Sul as not a slot corners simply because he's better on the edge, he'd be our slot corner all this time if Stokes hadn't been hurt, obviously it takes some games to make a positional transition, Woody was hoping we wouldn't ask him to, mostly just didn't want to do it, did it well or good enough at least once he committed, same with Douglas.

I tend to disagree concerning speed as well, speed or lack of it is more easily exposed on boundary or in space, Douglas has enough to play any DB position

What do you all think of the Douglas departure as something else entirely. A wake up call to a lot of veterans.

Yosh Nijman: You play the best games of your life for the rest of the season. Or else you can hope for veteran's minimum somewhere else
JRJ: Ditto.
Myers: You are going to warm the pine if you don't improve - soon. Like now
Jenkins: You are healthy now. Play like it.
Degura: Who?
Dillon: You are an UFA too. You have already lost millions this season. Try getting some of it back.

On D:
Clark: WTF????? What happened to you now that you got paid?
Wyatt: Ever heard of playing smart?
Walker: Keep your emotions under control.
Nixon: We gave you the chance to be more than a ST player. Don't blow that chance.
Savage: You are an UFA after this season

In short, there is NO ONE on this team that is guaranteed a spot on next year's roster, except maybe the WR's and Musgrave. NFL means Not For Long in Green Bay, if this team does not start playing better.

go pak go wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 21:07

German_Panzer wrote: ↑

03 Nov 2023 19:50

With the Douglas trade the Packers basically agreed with me. Now it is not about if we tank anymore but only how we tank.

There are trades literally every year.

Are you saying that every trade that involves a player the selling team is "tanking"?

No, but Rasul was a quality defender you would not give away if you‘d „go for it“. Yes, it was just one player bc frankly we couldnt offer much anyway. For instance nobody would give sh*t for 29y. old Aaron Jones with hamstring issues. For me it is a clear sign Guteküche wants to build for the future and not caring too much about this season (= tanking).

LombardiTime wrote: ↑

04 Nov 2023 13:25

I see no possible scenario in which Mark Murphy fires GM Brian Gutekunst in 2024, because it is Murphy's final year with the team.

I could maybe see LaFleur getting fired if it continues to look as bad on the field as it has the past 4 games, but that is yet to be determined, and I would not be in favor of Murphy hiring a new head coach on his way out the door.

My biggest fear is that we are going to go into 2024 with a lame duck President and wait until whomever succeeds Murphy in 2025 to make decisions on the futures of the GM and head coach, even if we have another season like this one in 2024.

Just seems to be a lot of uncertainty throughout the organization right now.

I think this is sadly what is going to happen.

They’ll let Murphy stay which means he keeps Gutenbumst who will be using the best pick we’ve had since 1989. I think Gutenbumst will try to justify he never got to pick his HC and wants to get his own guy.

Then because the roster is still bad the new president comes in, cleans house to bring in his own guy who wants his own guy and we are back to rebuilding on top of someone else’s rebuild.

Essentially we are going the way of the Star Wars sequels and.