Trade down possibilities

[El_Lobo_3]

I'm a big fan of the Pack going OLB/DE in this draft with guys like Orakpo, Brown, Maybin...and I'm a huge fan of Brian Cushing and his abilities and passion for the game...

Let's say somebody like a Maclin or Sanchez are still on the board while the Packers are on the clock, and we could trade down and pick up a few extra picks and still get a guy we want, what are some ideas you would like to see happen?

I know I would love to trade down and grab Cushing while still getting an extra pick later...any thoughts?

[aaprigs311]

Cushing sucks. He'd be the last guy I'd want in the first. I would pass on him in the second too if for some reason he dropped. (Wouldn't be completely stunned) I hate Orakpo too. Brown or Maybin I'd be very happy with.

[ReasonablySober]

If Sanchez or Stafford (or one of the top OTs) is on the board

From Detroit
#33
2010 1st

From Green Bay
#9

[jakecronus8]

If Sanchez or Stafford (or one of the top OTs) is on the board

From Detroit
#33
2010 1st

From Green Bay
#9

I would like this also, but I don't know if Detroit would be willing to do that given the qb's in next year's draft. If Crabtree is available, I'd call Philly and try to get those two #1's for #9 and another pick.

[El Duderino]

If Sanchez or Stafford (or one of the top OTs) is on the board

From Detroit
#33
2010 1st

From Green Bay
#9

I don't think Ted would do it

[eagle13]

Well Detroit is the one team I'd go along with for a 1st next year.

My #1 preferance is to deal down and get two 1sts or an extra 2nd in this year.
I like the deal w/ Philly for 2 1sts this year.

But most any trade is better than using the 9.
Tho ASmith would be OK.

[aaprigs311]

I think if Smith or Raji are on the board at 9 you gotta take one of them. Otherwise trade down and grab a Matthews/Britton later in the first and collect an extra first day pick. I wonder how the economy is going to affect the trade value chart. There's gotta be some sort of change with few teams wanting to trade into the top 10. It's something to chew on.

[Jollay]

I can't believe with an abudance of good defensive players available, a front seven with multiple question areas/holes, and no FA help apparently imminent, we would trade down when we could draft the best DT available at 9 or a another good front seven guy.

[LUKE23]

I can't believe with an abudance of good defensive players available, a front seven with multiple question areas/holes, and no FA help apparently imminent, we would trade down when we could draft the best DT available at 9 or a another good front seven guy.

Raji is the only elite front 7 player that could be there at 9. You never draft only for need at 9, and Raji is the only 3-4 DE/DT that is top 9 worthy in this draft.

If we trade down with Raji on the board, I will be livid, but wouldn't be as upset if he wasn't, depending on what we got instead.

[El Duderino]

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/insider/index.shtml

Sat in on the first hour of a media conference call this afternoon with NFL Network draft analyst Mike Mayock, who offered two bold statements regarding teams that hold top-10 picks this year:

They're all looking to get rid of those picks, and they're willing to accept less -- perhaps as a little as half -- of the value the standard trade chart dictates.

"Every team in the top 10 is looking to trade out," Mayock said. "Never seen it, never seen the situation quite this heavy. And the theory is, everybody knows we’re upside-down right now with this draft. The rookies are getting paid way too much money proportionate to their value. So, teams are scared to death of missing (in) the top-10.

"Here’s what happening, though, that I think is really interesting, and I’m anxious to see if this trend plays out. That whole trade chart that all the teams used to use, it began to go out the window last year, and I think, like the economy, it’s completely out the window now. So, I think any team in the top 10 that is looking to get out will listen to any reasonable offer, and more than ever, teams are looking to get down (to picks) 15 to 25, because you can get the same kind of player at (No.) 20 as you can at (No.) 7, and you pay one-third the money."

Teams long have used a common chart like this one to match up the value of draft picks used in a trade. There have been rumors and reports of a new trade chart circulating that better takes into account the financial burden carried by high selections.

The Packers hold the No. 9 pick, and General Manager Ted Thompson has a history of trading down. Whether he does so with his top selection this year remains to be seen.

[Jollay]

I can't believe with an abudance of good defensive players available, a front seven with multiple question areas/holes, and no FA help apparently imminent, we would trade down when we could draft the best DT available at 9 or a another good front seven guy.

Raji is the only elite front 7 player that could be there at 9. You never draft only for need at 9, and Raji is the only 3-4 DE/DT that is top 9 worthy in this draft.

If we trade down with Raji on the board, I will be livid, but wouldn't be as upset if he wasn't, depending on what we got instead.

Yeah, depends where we go to, but if we move out of the range of Orkapo, Brown, Maybin by trading down; not psyched about that either.

The other variable if we're not going to fill one of our multiple holes in FA, is trying to turn #9 into multiple picks in the late first, second, whatever.

With holes on the OL, DL, and (somewhat) LB, and other very minor ones, thats a possibility.

Still likely rather take the pick and get a better chance of getting an impact guy.

[MajorDad]

what's wrong with trading up? I know that's not a phrase in TT's vocabulary. but it has been done in the past. other teams do it with us all the time. Why don't we ever do it? Just once i'd like to see TT trade all his 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th round picks he loves so much for a couple of extra 2nd round picks. admittedly, this isn't a really strong draft class

he could fill the holes by signing fringe FA's.

[Wade-A-Holic]

what's wrong with trading up? I know that's not a phrase in TT's vocabulary. but it has been done in the past. other teams do it with us all the time. Why don't we ever do it? Just once i'd like to see TT trade all his 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th round picks he loves so much for a couple of extra 2nd round picks. admittedly, this isn't a really strong draft class

he could fill the holes by signing fringe FA's.

Actually, I do think we can expect some more standing pat and/or trading up from here on out. Thompson has said that he's content with the depth that he's built and happy that there is competition in training camp - something that absolutely did not exist during the Sherman era. I expect the drafts to be a bit more qualitative as opposed to quantitative from now on. However, I don't see much incentive to trade up from 9 or from 41 in this draft, though.

[HercegSlavonac]

Thompson has said that he's content with the depth that he's built and happy that there is competition in training camp - something that absolutely did not exist during the Sherman era. I expect the drafts to be a bit more qualitative as opposed to quantitative from now on. However, I don't see much incentive to trade up from 9 or from 41 in this draft, though.

What competition in training camp? Crap competing against crap isn't competition. And when comparing Sherman to Thompson, who's teams made it to the playoffs more?

[ReasonablySober]

Thompson has said that he's content with the depth that he's built and happy that there is competition in training camp - something that absolutely did not exist during the Sherman era. I expect the drafts to be a bit more qualitative as opposed to quantitative from now on. However, I don't see much incentive to trade up from 9 or from 41 in this draft, though.

What competition in training camp? Crap competing against crap isn't competition. And when comparing Sherman to Thompson, who's teams made it to the playoffs more?

You're really going to compare Sherman's job at GM to Thompson?

The Mike Sherman that...

- Gave a massive deals to Joe Johnson and Cledius Hunt?
- Traded away draft picks for Rod Walker, Terry Glenn, Derek Combs, R-Kal Truluk?
- Traded up or future picks in the draft to nab Kenny Peterson, James Lee, Chris Johnson, BJ Ryan and Hunter Hillenmeyer

?

[HercegSlavonac]

Thompson has said that he's content with the depth that he's built and happy that there is competition in training camp - something that absolutely did not exist during the Sherman era. I expect the drafts to be a bit more qualitative as opposed to quantitative from now on. However, I don't see much incentive to trade up from 9 or from 41 in this draft, though.

What competition in training camp? Crap competing against crap isn't competition. And when comparing Sherman to Thompson, who's teams made it to the playoffs more?

You're really going to compare Sherman's job at GM to Thompson?

The Mike Sherman that...

- Gave a massive deals to Joe Johnson and Cledius Hunt?
- Traded away draft picks for Rod Walker, Terry Glenn, Derek Combs, R-Kal Truluk?
- Traded up or future picks in the draft to nab Kenny Peterson, James Lee, Chris Johnson, BJ Ryan and Hunter Hillenmeyer

?

Where is all of this depth that we have great competition? Didn't some use injuries as an excuse last year. If we have that "competition" that Ted claims we have, it shouldn't matter who gets injured.
And I wasn't the original person comparing Sherman and Ted. If you're going to use Sherman the GM a comparison to Ted, then yeah, I'll throw back the question, how many times have Ted's teams made the playoffs?

[ReasonablySober]

Once. Is there a point you're trying to make? A correlation between playoff appearances and Sherman the GM? If you want to say that Sherman was a better GM than Thompson, just say it.

[automatic44]

Thompson has said that he's content with the depth that he's built and happy that there is competition in training camp - something that absolutely did not exist during the Sherman era. I expect the drafts to be a bit more qualitative as opposed to quantitative from now on. However, I don't see much incentive to trade up from 9 or from 41 in this draft, though.

What competition in training camp? Crap competing against crap isn't competition. And when comparing Sherman to Thompson, who's teams made it to the playoffs more?

You're really going to compare Sherman's job at GM to Thompson?

The Mike Sherman that...

- Gave a massive deals to Joe Johnson and Cledius Hunt?
- Traded away draft picks for Rod Walker, Terry Glenn, Derek Combs, R-Kal Truluk?
- Traded up or future picks in the draft to nab Kenny Peterson, James Lee, Chris Johnson, BJ Ryan and Hunter Hillenmeyer

?

Don't forget, he also thought Ahmad Carroll was the second coming of Champ Bailey. And BJ Sander would revolutionize the art of punting

[Wade-A-Holic]

What competition in training camp? Crap competing against crap isn't competition. And when comparing Sherman to Thompson, who's teams made it to the playoffs more?

Don't you remember how after every training camp, every beat writer who followed the Packers would say that there was no real competition or depth on the roster to speak of and that if the team was being honest in its assessment of itself, it would be having a had time finding 53 players worthy of making any NFL roster. You might just be mis-understanding my point. I'm saying that during the Sherman years, players 43-53 were guys that would now be stuck on the practice squad at best. That's not the case anymore, and it's because Thompson focuses on developing the roster in its entirety as opposed to overpaying the top 40 players or so and hoping nobody gets hurt.

[El Duderino]

Sherman largely rode the talent Ron Wolf brought in for those playoff berths. Once Wolf left, the overall talent on the team slid down each season.