RealGM

Posting here because I don't want to hijack the other thread:

ReasonablySober wrote:

Profound23 wrote:If there is any truth of Lamar to the Pats (as a possibility) I trade Aaron to the Jets for a 2024 1st and I am good.

First off the 13th pick this year is probably equal to the 23rd pick next year. Second off, if Lamar goes to the Pats and Tua/Lamar/Josh Allen stay healthy.....the Jets could be the last place team in that division and we could be staring at a top 10 pick like Seattle did with Russell Wilson.

I'm with you. They also play the Chiefs, Chargers, Cowboys, Eagles, and Giants. There's some layups on their schedule too but that might be a six win team.

That is exactly what I am saying. Jets have some nice pieces and with Rodgers they could EASILY make the playoffs.....but two of the teams in their division also have nice pieces and good QBs. Tua has injury concerns, but IF he can stay healthy that team will be in the postseason. If Allen stays healthy they will be in the postseason. And IF the Ravens sign Lamar that is another potential playoff team.

A lot of IFs, but even if some of those things don't happen and the Jets make the playoffs and get pick 24 or something, next year's draft is better than this year so that could be an equal player and it's worth the gamble. Jets start off losing to Bills, Fins, KC and it becomes a snowball effect. In this situation, if Love stinks we might have two of the top picks in a stacked draft.

Profound23 wrote:Posting here because I don't want to hijack the other thread:

ReasonablySober wrote:

Profound23 wrote:If there is any truth of Lamar to the Pats (as a possibility) I trade Aaron to the Jets for a 2024 1st and I am good.

First off the 13th pick this year is probably equal to the 23rd pick next year. Second off, if Lamar goes to the Pats and Tua/Lamar/Josh Allen stay healthy.....the Jets could be the last place team in that division and we could be staring at a top 10 pick like Seattle did with Russell Wilson.

I'm with you. They also play the Chiefs, Chargers, Cowboys, Eagles, and Giants. There's some layups on their schedule too but that might be a six win team.

That is exactly what I am saying. Jets have some nice pieces and with Rodgers they could EASILY make the playoffs.....but two of the teams in their division also have nice pieces and good QBs. Tua has injury concerns, but IF he can stay healthy that team will be in the postseason. If Allen stays healthy they will be in the postseason. And IF the Ravens sign Lamar that is another potential playoff team.

A lot of IFs, but even if some of those things don't happen and the Jets make the playoffs and get pick 24 or something, next year's draft is better than this year so that could be an equal player and it's worth the gamble. Jets start off losing to Bills, Fins, KC and it becomes a snowball effect. In this situation, if Love stinks we might have two of the top picks in a stacked draft.

Not to mention that the Jets trading for Rodgers could blow up spectacularly in their faces. I really think the endgame for all of this is at the extremes: either a Super Bowl or a crash and burn.

What was one of Hackett's main issues in Denver? Acquiescing to all of Russell Wilson's demands to run the offense he wanted rather than the offense as designed. Where have we heard that before? I think it's quite likely we see the same hero ball/end-McCarthy offense we saw last year and in 2017-2018 in NY.

That's really why I'd rather have the 2024 first unconditional from the Jets--it's probably a 20s pick, but I like taking a chance on the idea the Pack could win the lottery like Seattle did.

Hackett didn't call plays in Green Bay, the offense was very good. He did call plays in Denver and had the bottom rated offense when he turned over play calling to Kubiak in week 10. Not apples to apples of course.

I don't really see how Rodgers to the Jets "blows up". They had Wilson, White and Flacco last year. If they were giving up a Russell package then sure, but they aren't. I guess if we somehow get a 2024 first and it ends up top 10 you could say it "blew up" for them. Who knows, maybe Wilson learning from Rodgers for a year two lights a fire. Doubtful but possible ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The Jets are a super bowl contender with Rodgers. Make them pay for it. They can give me a first or they can **** off.

The AFC does seem tough on paper. The odds would be higher the Jets miss the playoffs with Rodgers than win the conference. So I can see why the Jets would be leery of giving up the farm. It's not like it's a slam dunk you're the favorite now move.

It's why to be a package built on conditional picks makes sense. Like a 2 this year, a pick in 24 based on team performance, and a pick in 25 based on if he's on the team in 24


Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

The Jets will be very good with rodgers. Thinking otherwise it's foolish.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

WeekapaugGroove wrote:The AFC does seem tough on paper. The odds would be higher the Jets miss the playoffs with Rodgers than win the conference. So I can see why the Jets would be leery of giving up the farm. It's not like it's a slam dunk you're the favorite now move.

It's why to be a package built on conditional picks makes sense. Like a 2 this year, a pick in 24 based on team performance, and a pick in 25 based on if he's on the team in 24


Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

That's the roll of the dice here , they know the qbs they have won't cut it , after the season ended the clearly targeted Rodgers because they think that with him they title contenders , so why would we want conditional picks ? They want him come get him ! I don't care if he plays next year , not our problem ! I want this years 1st and 4th and next years 2nd !

Mtsportsfan wrote:

WeekapaugGroove wrote:The AFC does seem tough on paper. The odds would be higher the Jets miss the playoffs with Rodgers than win the conference. So I can see why the Jets would be leery of giving up the farm. It's not like it's a slam dunk you're the favorite now move.

It's why to be a package built on conditional picks makes sense. Like a 2 this year, a pick in 24 based on team performance, and a pick in 25 based on if he's on the team in 24


Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

That's the roll of the dice here , they know the qbs they have won't cut it , after the season ended the clearly targeted Rodgers because they think that with him they title contenders , so why would we want conditional picks ? They want him come get him ! I don't care if he plays next year , not our problem ! I want this years 1st and 4th and next years 2nd !

Why stop there, let's get 4 1sts? Seems reasonable since the jets have to make the trade.

What I was saying is it's good to understand the risk/reward/uncertainty for the Jets. Rodgers is definitely worth more to NY if he plays more than one year. If either side was willing to do whatever the deal would already be done. Conditional picks seems like a reasonable way for the Packers to get value and the Jets to mitigate risk and for everyone to get a trade done that they want to happen. Win/win

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

Listen, the Jets have been getting high firsts for decades. They've always been talking about the future. This gives them, the fans, and the NY media the opportunity to have at least one year of playing for something now. That's worth #13. I think there is serious egg on the face of both teams if they don't get it done. Both teams know that, so right now they're each waiting for the other team to cave. It's a game of chicken and we hopefully will win.

If Gute can pull #13 off, I'd drive up there myself and get down on my knees. I think they land on a package kinda like this:

2023 2nd rounder
2024 Conditional 3rd that becomes a 2nd if Jets make playoffs, 1st if they make or win Super Bowl
Corey Davis or Elijah Moore (preferably Moore, obviously)

Matches Malone wrote:If Gute can pull #13 off, I'd drive up there myself and get down on my knees. I think they land on a package kinda like this:

2023 2nd rounder
2024 Conditional 3rd that becomes a 2nd if Jets make playoffs, 1st if they make or win Super Bowl
Corey Davis or Elijah Moore (preferably Moore, obviously)

This is basically exactly what I am expecting and I'd be happy with that package

RRyder823 wrote:

M-C-G wrote:EXACTLY the SAME thing happening EXACTLY the SAME way is not the same as 'similar' and 'comparable'...I'm shocked by how anyone would disagree with this situations being 'similar'. For reference Websters dictionary

1
: having characteristics in common : strictly comparable
2
: alike in substance or essentials : CORRESPONDING

Because if it isnt a 1 for 1 retelling it's totally not similar. And The Force Awakens isn't similar to A New Hope

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Do either of you think anyone disputes that level of similarity?

Of course they're similar on a "Packers drafted a replacement early and groomed him for three years before trading the incumbent to the Jets" level.

That is not the argument at all. That's what you're strawmanning.

The argument is about you guys using those high-level similarities as evidence that the current decisions were smart/sound because it worked out last time.

And there are enough differences between the two scenarios that make drafting a replacement in 2020 (in the middle of a SB window) a dumb decision, where in 2005 it was smart one.

Strawmanning this position as "derp they're saying no similarities hur hur" is General Board sh*t.

Lippo wrote:

rilamann wrote:

th87 wrote:
Murphy hasn't earned that right. The success for decades is almost 100% predicated on one grand slam decision in 1992 and another in 2005. Neither made by him.

Everything else has been average work at best.

I don't think people realize how hard it is to only win 2 Super Bowls in 31 seasons with a first ballot hall of famer at QB.

Colts Manning + Brees Saints

Haha I find this argument so annoying when its serious...like "eh SBs are hard, what can ya do?" Over and over we've been on the doorstep and fell short, and management did exactly nothing to address the weaknesses that caused it.

And regarding these QBs, gotta go deeper.

Manning had to face Brady a handful of times. Rodgers faced Colin Kaepernick and Jimmy G.

And why doesn't his time with Denver count? That's still 2 wins, 4 total appearances.

Brees is kind of similar, but Rodgers is significantly better as a QB. And the refs egregiously cost Brees a surefire SB appearance.

The only comparable talent to Rodgers is Mahomes, and he already has 2 wins in 3 appearances in like 5(?) years in the league.

th87 wrote:

RRyder823 wrote:

M-C-G wrote:EXACTLY the SAME thing happening EXACTLY the SAME way is not the same as 'similar' and 'comparable'...I'm shocked by how anyone would disagree with this situations being 'similar'. For reference Websters dictionary

Because if it isnt a 1 for 1 retelling it's totally not similar. And The Force Awakens isn't similar to A New Hope

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Do either of you think anyone disputes that level of similarity?

Of course they're similar on a "Packers drafted a replacement early and groomed him for three years before trading the incumbent to the Jets" level.

That is not the argument at all. That's what you're strawmanning.

The argument is about you guys using those high-level similarities as evidence that the current decisions were smart/sound because it worked out last time.

And there are enough differences between the two scenarios that make drafting a replacement in 2020 (in the middle of a SB window) a dumb decision, where in 2005 it was smart one.

Strawmanning this position as "derp they're saying no similarities hur hur" is General Board sh*t.

I don’t think you will go back through the threads around here but yes, people have mocked people saying it is similar. That’s a fact


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

M-C-G wrote:

th87 wrote:

RRyder823 wrote:Because if it isnt a 1 for 1 retelling it's totally not similar. And The Force Awakens isn't similar to A New Hope

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Do either of you think anyone disputes that level of similarity?

Of course they're similar on a "Packers drafted a replacement early and groomed him for three years before trading the incumbent to the Jets" level.

That is not the argument at all. That's what you're strawmanning.

The argument is about you guys using those high-level similarities as evidence that the current decisions were smart/sound because it worked out last time.

And there are enough differences between the two scenarios that make drafting a replacement in 2020 (in the middle of a SB window) a dumb decision, where in 2005 it was smart one.

Strawmanning this position as "derp they're saying no similarities hur hur" is General Board sh*t.

I don’t think you will go back through the threads around here but yes, people have mocked people saying it is similar. That’s a fact


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If so, that's insane. Obviously there are similarities at a high level.

th87 wrote:

RRyder823 wrote:

M-C-G wrote:EXACTLY the SAME thing happening EXACTLY the SAME way is not the same as 'similar' and 'comparable'...I'm shocked by how anyone would disagree with this situations being 'similar'. For reference Websters dictionary

Because if it isnt a 1 for 1 retelling it's totally not similar. And The Force Awakens isn't similar to A New Hope

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Do either of you think anyone disputes that level of similarity?

Of course they're similar on a "Packers drafted a replacement early and groomed him for three years before trading the incumbent to the Jets" level.

That is not the argument at all. That's what you're strawmanning.

The argument is about you guys using those high-level similarities as evidence that the current decisions were smart/sound because it worked out last time.

And there are enough differences between the two scenarios that make drafting a replacement in 2020 (in the middle of a SB window) a dumb decision, where in 2005 it was smart one.

Strawmanning this position as "derp they're saying no similarities hur hur" is General Board sh*t.

There's litterally posts stating "the two situations aren't similar at all" sooooooooo yes

Whether it's a smart decision or not is tied to whether Love becomes a Pro Bowl level player and is the QB the next 10+ years or if he isnt. Gutes job is 100% tied to that question


Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

WeekapaugGroove wrote:

Mtsportsfan wrote:

WeekapaugGroove wrote:The AFC does seem tough on paper. The odds would be higher the Jets miss the playoffs with Rodgers than win the conference. So I can see why the Jets would be leery of giving up the farm. It's not like it's a slam dunk you're the favorite now move.

It's why to be a package built on conditional picks makes sense. Like a 2 this year, a pick in 24 based on team performance, and a pick in 25 based on if he's on the team in 24


Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

That's the roll of the dice here , they know the qbs they have won't cut it , after the season ended the clearly targeted Rodgers because they think that with him they title contenders , so why would we want conditional picks ? They want him come get him ! I don't care if he plays next year , not our problem ! I want this years 1st and 4th and next years 2nd !

Why stop there, let's get 4 1sts? Seems reasonable since the jets have to make the trade.

What I was saying is it's good to understand the risk/reward/uncertainty for the Jets. Rodgers is definitely worth more to NY if he plays more than one year. If either side was willing to do whatever the deal would already be done. Conditional picks seems like a reasonable way for the Packers to get value and the Jets to mitigate risk and for everyone to get a trade done that they want to happen. Win/win

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

Wasn't asking for 4 1st round picks , just one and I would want this years pick. I get the idea of negotiating, but Jets came calling for a 4 time MVP QB and granted a older one. Once he's on your team he's your issue not ours . if we don't get multiple picks with at least one first rounder , then I would say we got fleeced ! The picks in 24 in my opinion will be at the back end of the draft and less valuable than this year , that's why I would prefer this years picks!

The 13th pick will not give them a chance at a superowl next year
. Arod will.

The fact we’re a few days into this, and no resolution makes me think this thread will be like the “Ramon Sessions Watch” thread from summer of 09.

msiris wrote:The 13th pick will not give them a chance at a superowl next year
. Arod will.

The Packers aren't a Superbowl contender next year with or without Aaron Rodgers