Why not trade away from next year to get the help we need this year?

play2win
Senior Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

I've always wondered about this and why so many people are opposed to trading away from next year's draft. To me, it seems we have a window of opportunity, and we are in DIRE need of upgrades at so many positions. Why wait? The player you trade up for will be on your roster with a year's experience under his belt next year.

We have so many needs, that I am hoping Ted makes a change in his philosophy and goes all in this May in the draft. I would love for him to land a couple of top talents trading up like he did in 2009 with the additions of Raji and Matthews. That trade up helped us win a SB.

I'd gladly trade away our R1 for 2015 if it would help us eliminate our problems on D, which right now are vast.

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

beast
Select Member

10 years ago

I think because you normal lose value that way... like say a 1st round next year is worth a 2nd round this year ... while that might not be true that's normally how draft picks are traded.. get one round this year but have to give up your pick in the next higher round the next.

If there is a good player for it then you can surely think about trying it though, I think Ted Thompson has said he doesn't like trading draft picks from one year to another as he prefers to have it balance out more and you never know when one year will be really good and the next one won't be or vice versa

nerdmann
Premier Member

10 years ago

Ted takes the long view, and I'm glad he does that. He does not mortgage the future, or we wouldn't have had a chance the last few years.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

DakotaT
Select Member

10 years ago

Ted takes the long view, and I'm glad he does that. He does not mortgage the future, or we wouldn't have had a chance the last few years.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

Since first ballot hall of famers don't fall from the sky, how many more years do we have to win some more Super Bowls? Favre, Rodgers, ? do we have a long view, or a shorter window than we think?

dhazer
Veteran Member

10 years ago

Ted takes the long view, and I'm glad he does that. He does not mortgage the future, or we wouldn't have had a chance the last few years.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I say we go the other way and trade our 1st this year for a 1st next year to a team like the jags or Browns :)

Look what the Rams got from trading away their 2nd overall pick 2 years ago for 3 1st round picks and now this year they have the 2nd overall pick from the redskins and then they have their own pick at #13.

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)

nerdmann
Premier Member

10 years ago

Since first ballot hall of famers don't fall from the sky, how many more years do we have to win some more Super Bowls? Favre, Rodgers, ? do we have a long view, or a shorter window than we think?

Originally Posted by: DakotaT

Mike can do with Tolzien what he did with Rich Gannon. We'll see how he develops. Could be the next Hasselbeck.

At any rate, I'm not going to live in fear of the future. We developed the guy we've got now, nothing says we couldn't do it again. And btw, this team has won 12 world championships without him!

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

sschind
Senior Member

10 years ago

Originally Posted by: dhazer

And If I were the Rams I'd trade it away again. With so many teams needing a QB someone (vikings maybe) might be willing to swap places and throw in a few extra picks. Maybe and second and a 4th.

In our case we don't have the #2 pick we have the #23 pick. I doubt the Jags would trade their #1 next year, which will likely be a top 5 pick for the #23 pick this year. That would be just stupid. Which means maybe the Browns would do it.

I missed the smiley at the end of you post. I answered as if you were making a serious suggestion. That may not be the case, sorry.

steveishere
Veteran Member

10 years ago

I don't see an extra 2nd round pick being the solution to our problems and at an unknown cost. If some badass prospect for whatever reason falls to the second round that's one thing but going into the draft planning to trade a future 1st for some as yet unknown player... that's just silly.

Problem is you don't know what you are giving away, Rodgers could go out for the year week 1 and we end up with a top 5 pick next year. Not only do we lost the top 5 pick then we also lost it for some player that probably ended up being irrelevant for that season anyways. Not really worth it.

wpr
Preferred Member

10 years ago

Earlier this week I was looking at Walter's site. They feel the 2015 draft will have more quality players than the 2014 draft.

They would lose 2 ways. Giving up a 1st for a 2nd or a 2nd for a 3rd. Who every they draft this year would need to be rated a round higher on their board than they take him. And the player they lose out on next year would be better than who ever is picked in that spot in the 2014 draft.

nerdmann
Premier Member

10 years ago

#10

Originally Posted by: wpr

I could see Ted taking advantage of an arbitrage opportunity of that sort.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

packerfanoutwest (8m) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (1h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (12h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (12h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (12h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (12h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (12h) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (15h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (15h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (16h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (18h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (18h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (18h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (18h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (18h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (18h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (18h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (18h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (19h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (20h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (20h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (20h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (20h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (20h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (20h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (21h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (21h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (22h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (22h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (22h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (22h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (22h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (22h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS