Why not trade away from next year to get the help we need this year?· Page 11

QCHuskerFan
Member

10 years ago

I think 1st rd picks may have become more expensive to trade for since the last CBA. It limited the big money given to 1st rounders so teams have more reason not to trade now. Just my thought.

Sschind, I am confident our pick next year will be #32. So quit worrying about #20 or #25 or #29! :)

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

sschind
Senior Member

10 years ago

#102

Sschind, I am confident our pick next year will be #32. So quit worrying about #20 or #25 or #29! :)

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan

I know I know, I'm with you on that, I just didn't want to sound arrogant if you know what I mean.

QCHuskerFan
Member

10 years ago

#103

One last thought on the elite defense. I live in IL so I am constantly exposed to Bears fans. They spent the entire Lovey Smith tenure bragging about their defense. Where'd it get them? How many trophies did they hoist? They didn't even really get close consistently. But they had Urlacher!!! Yippee.

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

mi_keys
Senior Member

10 years ago

#104

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan

I live in Chicago now so thank God they didn't. God bless Sexy Rexy.

Born and bred a cheesehead

play2win
Senior Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#105

So, let's say AZ, with the #20 pick, wants to trade down for more. They only have 6 picks in this draft.

Would you trade away next year's R1, this year's R3 #85, R4 #121 and R5 #161?

That would net us 2 first round picks, we would keep our R2 #53, our R3 #98, our R5 #176, R6 #197 and R7 #236.

I would love for Ted to do this if he saw fit to add players he liked at both #20 and 21.

joemailman
Registered

10 years ago

#106

Originally Posted by: play2win

It's an interesting idea, and if the right players were available, it could be justified. I don't think Arizona would do it though, because if the trade helps the Packers this year, the 1st round pick they get next year might be a lot lower than the one they're giving up this year. Plus next year's draft will probably be weaker than this year's draft.

play2win
Senior Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#107

Can you imagine adding both Ryan Shazier and Kelvin Benjamin in R1? Or Calvin Pryor and CJ Mosley? That's kind of what I am hoping for, while still holding onto our R2 and an R3. We have the firepower to do that.

nerdmann
Premier Member

10 years ago

#108

Originally Posted by: play2win

Last year, Ted got both Eddie Lacy AND Johnathan Franklin, and didn't even need a R1 to get either one. LOL

“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.”

DarkaneRules
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#109

The more attempts you have at the plate, the more chances you have to knock one or more out of the park.

Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance

play2win
Senior Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#110

The more attempts you have at the plate, the more chances you have to knock one or more out of the park.

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules

We know Ted can find his gems, and along with that there can be a bunch of duds. Saw Terrell Manning was released by SD this week. Out of 8 picks from 2012, 4 are no longer on the team in McMillian R4, Manning R5, Datko and Coleman R7s. From 2011, only 3 out of 10 picks remain on the team, Sherrod, Cobb and House.

I'd rather consolidate our picks in the front of the draft and trade away the back end. Maybe all of 161, 179 and 236. Figure, we could trade with WAS our 121, 161 and 197 for their 102, the second pick in R4. Now, if we were to also trade our R1 from 2015 to get an additional R2, we could wind up with quite a haul.

I would also trade an R2 from next year along with our R3 #85 to IND for their R2 at 59.

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

beast (5m) : 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 (6m) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (16m) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (28m) : 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 (37m) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (57m) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (1h) : 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 (1h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (2h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (2h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (2h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (2h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (2h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (3h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (3h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (4h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (4h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (4h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (4h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (4h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (4h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

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

beast (5h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (5h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (5h) : 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 (5h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (5h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (5h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (5h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (5h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (5h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (5h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (5h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (5h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (5h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (5h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (5h) : Packers will get in

beast (5h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (5h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (5h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (7h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (8h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (9h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (18h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (18h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

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

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS