McGinn: Packers Should Trade Jennings

Post #1 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 2:34 am

If this wasn't McGinn I'd say it was classic Whitlock link bait.

Link.

LUKE23 · Post #2 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 2:39 am

If he's not going to extend for a reasonable amount, McGinn is probably right. That said, trades in the NFL aren't nearly as easy to accomplish as MLB/NBA.

I still like our weapons without Jennings, obviously, but I'd be hoping to land another WR in the top 2 rounds soon if we did move him.

Ayt · Post #3 » by **Ayt** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 2:40 am

This has to be one of the worst articles McGinn has written. It doesn't make any sense to trade Jennings in season. WTF is he talking about?

If Jennings is really that hot of a commodity that we can't re-sign him, you use the franchise tag on him and trade him next offseason. Or, we just use him this last year to try to help us win another SB as our best WR (and I think he still is) and he ends up walking (in a season where he'll be turning 30 in the first month of the season). Trading him in season is moronic and counterproductive on every level.

Just to reiterate, WTF is he talking about? Did someone lobotomize McGinn?

Post #4 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 2:54 am

King:

Really smart idea by @BobMcGinn, that the Pack should trade Jennings. Would expect nothing less from Bob.

Honestly, I'd listen to what offers are out there.

Ayt · Post #5 » by **Ayt** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:00 am

How would we benefit from trading Jennings in season? It is great to say we are deep at WR, but there is a huge difference between Greg Jennings getting an enormous amount of snaps at WR compared to James Jones, which is what would happen if Jennings was gone. People seem to ignore the fact that Cobb takes no snaps as an outside WR (and by no snaps, I mean literally 0%). Beyond that, Cobb was very effective in our 4 WR, 1 TE set with Jennings, Jordy, Jones, and Finley as the other recievers. Remove Jennings and replace him with DD and that lineup isn't as imposing.

This is an atrocious idea.

midranger · Post #6 » by **midranger** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:14 am

Agreed with Ayt.

Unless someone comes knocking with Joe Thomas or JJ Watt, what could possibly help us? The 2nd or 3rd pick we can get for him? That type of deal will be available after the season or as t and t.

I think people forget that we should be trying to win a Super Bowl this year. Forget about next year and beyond. TT will work that out when it happens.

BUCKnation · Post #7 » by **BUCKnation** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:29 am

Agree with Ayt as well. You can tag him and since he is actually probably worth the money, you can trade him. An in season trade would be dumb, unless another superstar is available.

Marley2Hendrix · Post #8 » by **Marley2Hendrix** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:49 am

Fwiw, in the last podcast by McGinn and Dunne, McGinn was rather steadfast that this was team was not a owl caliber team if I recall correctly. Not sure if that impacts this stance on Jennings. Like DB, I'd at least see what's out there without actively shopping him.

Post #9 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:26 pm

I guess going back to observable patterns, it seems to me like this team is most effective when it features Greg Jennings. I think there is some win correlation mojo when Jennings gets a lot of touches but maybe I'm wrong on that.

This does play back into McGinn's belief that this is not a super bowl caliber team and he's already thinking about building back for 2013. And I'm sure he feels those insider vibes from the locker room that MD on this board alluded to three years ago (i.e. that for some reason Greg Jennings wants out of GB and always has)

The one trade McGinn forgot to mention was the most obvious to me. John Jefferson. We paid with big-time assets back then. If we somehow get waxed tonight, and a JJ type deal is out there, you've got to listen.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/29328669.html

"More than a quarter century later, Lynn Dickey still fondly remembers the day head coach Bart Starr delivered the startling news.

John Jefferson, star receiver in the San Diego Chargers' famed "Air Coryell" offense, was about to become a Green Bay Packer.

The date was Sept. 17, 1981, after a practice in preparation for an upcoming game against the Los Angeles Rams.

"It was a quarterback's dream come true," Dickey said. "Bart came into the locker room and told us that we traded for John Jefferson, though it wasn't official yet. I couldn't believe it. I just shook Bart's hand and said, 'Thank you.' "

The addition of John "J.J." Jefferson to Green Bay's tandem of James Lofton and Paul Coffman gave the Packers the most feared receiving corps in the National Football League.

Jefferson was the first receiver in league history to gain 1,000 yards in each of his first three seasons, thanks to prolific Charger quarterback Dan Fouts and pass-happy coach Don Coryell.

One thing that had faded from Dickey's memory was the price the Packers paid to acquire the three-time Pro Bowl receiver from the Chargers: wide receiver Aundra Thompson, second-round draft choices in 1982 and 1984, a first-round selection in 1983, and a swap of draft positions in 1982.

"Wow, that was a lot," Dickey said. "I forgot we gave up that much. But J.J. was a huge reason we were pretty successful and put up a lot of points. We had Lofton, Coffman, and were bringing Phillip Epps along. Plus we had Eddie Lee Ivery and Gerry Ellis coming out of the backfield. We just had trouble stopping teams."

Unfortunately, the Packers' explosive offense was offset by porous defenses during Jefferson's tenure in Green Bay from 1981-'84. The Packers finished 8-8 in three of those seasons, and only made the playoffs in strike-shortened 1982 with a 5-3-1 record.

Green Bay then scored a club post-season record 41 points in a first-round victory over St. Louis at Lambeau Field, with Jefferson recording two touchdowns. They then ran up 363 yards in a stirring second-half comeback to rally from a 20-7 halftime deficit before falling, 37-26, to the Dallas Cowboys on the road.

In an unprecedented event, Jefferson, Lofton, and Coffman made the Pro Bowl - the first time three receivers from the same team had done so. Jefferson shared the game's MVP honors with Fouts in the NFC's 20-19 victory.

Newz · Post #10 » by **Newz** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:44 pm

Why wouldn't we just wait, tag him and trade him in the offseason?

I'm not sure what we gain from trading him now...

Post #11 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:54 pm

Newz wrote:Why wouldn't we just wait, tag him and trade him in the offseason?

I'm not sure what we gain from trading him now...

Easier said than done in the NFL. You've got to find a team willing to not only pay Jennings the big money he wants but also give up a meaningful asset for him in addition to committing to a major contract.

You don't have to trade him now. Just listen to see if someone still thinks they are a WR away from making the playoffs and wants to give up a really good package. For me I'd like a number one and a number 3 to do it. And I'd only do it if we are 0-2 or 1-3 and don't look good in the process. Nor would I deal him for only a 2nd.

I just think Jennings is more effective as the feature guy. And right now it doesn't appear like that will be the case. Looks to be a spread it around focus with Finley, James Jones, Cobb and obviously Jordy.

mlloyd10 · Post #12 » by **mlloyd10** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 1:09 pm

If we do start taking offers for Jennings, i agree that it must be a deal that we have a chance of getting a franchise player. One team that comes to mind is the Dolphins. We have connections with team (Joe Philbin) and they are in desperate need of a WR. I would want Jake Long, but they are extremely thin at the OL.

LUKE23 · Post #13 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 1:25 pm

I don't think this even comes into play unless the team completely bottoms out and doesn't look like a playoff team in late October. Could happen, but not likely. I surely don't think it's going to even be discussed in September regardless.

emunney · Post #14 » by **emunney** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 1:28 pm

I agree with pp that this clearly goes hand in hand with McGinn's preseason thoughts that we're taking a substantial step back and aren't 'true' contenders. If you think about it in that framework, trading Jennings makes a lot of sense.

I'm of the belief, though, that if you're even in the playoff picture, you keep all your blue chip guys regardless of age or contract status. You don't have to be one of the 2-3 best teams in the league to win a Super Bowl (although I still believe the Packers are).

Obviously this could change depending on what could be offered. But for a 2nd rounder? Not worth the psychic damage.

Newz · Post #15 » by **Newz** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 1:29 pm

How many times in recent memories have players like Jennings and a Jake Long been swapped? The only one I can remember is Portis for Bailey. I just don't really see that as realistic with the way that the NFL works. Player-for-player trades seem almost impossible to pull off, especially during the year.

I think the tag-and-trade scenario at the end of the year is far more likely... or trading him at the deadline if we are playing terrible and someone offers a great pick or two because they panic.

PkrsBcksGphsMqt · Post #16 » by **PkrsBcksGphsMqt** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 1:50 pm

I agree that tagging and trading at the end of the season is probably the best move. With that being said, if we were offered a 1st round pick that would likely be a top 5-10 pick, I'd think long and hard about it. We could REALLY use a top 5-10 pick defensive player. I'm also extremely bullish on Cobb, so trading Jennings would only allow him to flourish even more, plus we still have DD who some of you are pissed isn't getting more time.

Post #17 » by **paulpressey25** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 2:18 pm

I never have really understood why there aren't more player for player trades in the NFL. We all can come up scenarios that make sense. Like Jennings for anything we are short on right now.

McGinn in a tweet the other night made a comment that Jennings hasn't finished the last three games due to "injury". Again, I think McGinn knows more inside information about the locker-room than he's able to state publicly in these articles. It isn't that hard to speculate that Jennings wants to be "the man" as far as the #1 target and to get paid as such with a $13-$15mm a year contract. And the Packers don't appear to want to fulfill wish #1 and won't have the cap space to fulfill wish #2.

Newz · Post #18 » by **Newz** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 2:20 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:I never have really understood why there aren't more player for player trades in the NFL. We all can come up scenarios that make sense. Like Jennings for anything we are short on right now.

I honestly cannot come up with many player-for-player trades that make sense for both teams.

LUKE23 · Post #19 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 2:23 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:
McGinn in a tweet the other night made a comment that Jennings hasn't finished the last three games due to "injury". Again, I think McGinn knows more inside information about the locker-room than he's able to state publicly in these articles. It isn't that hard to speculate that Jennings wants to be "the man" as far as the #1 target and to get paid as such with a $13-$15mm a year contract. And the Packers don't appear to want to fulfill wish #1 and won't have the cap space to fulfill wish #2.

I don't know if this is what you were eluding to, but it would make zero sense for Jennings to dog it at all this year, since he's playing for a contract. Also doesn't seem to be in his character, even if he doesn't want to be here. I don't think we re-sign him, but I do think he's going to play as hard as he can all year.

Post #20 » by **MickeyDavis** » Thu Sep 13, 2012 2:26 pm

I think sometimes it's cap related. When a player signs a contract the bonus he receives is spread out over the length of the deal. When a player is traded the remaining portion of the bonus is moved up and has to count against the cap for the current year. Of course that's a moot point when a player is in the last year of his deal, like Jennings.