Packers 2022 Offseason Thread - Adams Traded to Raiders for 2022 1st and 2nd Rd Picks

Matches Malone · Post #161 » by **Matches Malone** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:40 pm

I’m down with this dude… give us everything you own, Denver.

coolhandluke121 · Post #162 » by **coolhandluke121** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:52 pm

I honestly wouldn't even need anything but current and future picks for Rodgers and Adams. Such a deal would put Denver in obvious win-now mode, and I'd be happy to accommodate their needs if it helps persuade them to give up a haul of future assets.

Profound23 · Post #163 » by **Profound23** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:19 pm

I wouldn't mind Meinerz being a part of the deal too.

Meinerz, Jeudy, 3 firsts (including the #9 pick), 2 seconds

For Rodgers/Davante

Daver · Post #164 » by **Daver** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:42 pm

coolhandluke121 wrote:I honestly wouldn't even need anything but current and future picks for Rodgers and Adams. Such a deal would put Denver in obvious win-now mode, and I'd be happy to accommodate their needs if it helps persuade them to give up a haul of future assets.

All you want are draft picks thats it no fant or chubb or jeurdy or etc.
If i trade both or just rodgers i want at least 2 firsts 2 seconds n at least 3 players jeurdy fant n bridgewater or chubb

Matches Malone · Post #165 » by **Matches Malone** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:47 pm

If we do trade them, I still feel like we’re not going to get the overhaul we hope for. I’d love to be able to poach draft capital and young players but realistically we’re probably looking at two 1sts maybe a couple second or third rounders and maybe a young player.

coolhandluke121 · Post #166 » by **coolhandluke121** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:51 pm

Daver wrote:
coolhandluke121 wrote:I honestly wouldn't even need anything but current and future picks for Rodgers and Adams. Such a deal would put Denver in obvious win-now mode, and I'd be happy to accommodate their needs if it helps persuade them to give up a haul of future assets.

All you want are draft picks thats it no fant or chubb or jeurdy or etc.
If i trade both or just rodgers i want at least 2 firsts 2 seconds n at least 3 players jeurdy fant n bridgewater or chubb

Of course I want as much as possible, but the Packers don't have a ton of leverage and I think it would be dumb to insist on current players if Denver tries to trade extra picks instead. No idea about their cap implications and how that might come into play though.

Post #167 » by **MickeyDavis** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 4:21 pm

We have leverage in that we don't have to trade him. He'd have to play for us or retire. And he'd still be under contract and couldn't come back in a year and go elsewhere.

Obviously we won't do that, we want a return on him and would get nothing if he retires.

Daver · Post #168 » by **Daver** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:39 pm

If both want to be together in denver id tag adams and do this

Aaron Rodgers and Davante Adams for Jerry Jeudy, Bradley Chubb, Justin Simmons, 3 1sts and 2 2nds

RRyder823 · Post #169 » by **RRyder823** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:48 pm

Guys. We aren't tagging Adams. Let the tag and trade dream go

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

WeekapaugGroove · Post #170 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:52 pm

I hope I eat crow on this but I think a lot of you will be disappointed in what a real trade package will look like if they move Aaron this spring.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

Post #171 » by **ReasonablySober** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:57 pm

RRyder823 wrote:Guys. We aren't tagging Adams. Let the tag and trade dream go

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

I've been thinking that for months because I don't see how it could possibly work to get that far under the cap. But Rapaport saying it's going to happen makes me think the Packers somehow have an idea of how that is going to go. So maybe?

Daver · Post #172 » by **Daver** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:58 pm

RRyder823 wrote:Guys. We aren't tagging Adams. Let the tag and trade dream go

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Why would we let just adams walk for nothing

RRyder823 · Post #173 » by **RRyder823** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:03 pm

Daver wrote:
RRyder823 wrote:Guys. We aren't tagging Adams. Let the tag and trade dream go

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

Why would we let just adams walk for nothing

Because it's not a matter of "letting him walk" it's a matter of getting far enough below the cap to actually use the tag

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

RRyder823 · Post #174 » by **RRyder823** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:08 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
RRyder823 wrote:Guys. We aren't tagging Adams. Let the tag and trade dream go

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

I've been thinking that for months because I don't see how it could possibly work to get that far under the cap. But Rapaport saying it's going to happen makes me think the Packers somehow have an idea of how that is going to go. So maybe?

I hear ya but that Rapaport tweet just came off as someone that hadn't looked at any of the numbers and was just talking. But sure "maybe?"

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

coolhandluke121 · Post #175 » by **coolhandluke121** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:20 pm

I honestly don't know the NFL CBA well enough to be quoted on anything, but isn't it assumed the restructuring/extending A-Rod's deal would be part of the plan whether he stays or goes? Cutting enough people and restructuring a few deals, including A-Rod's, might be enough to tag Adams.

Reddeye · Post #176 » by **Reddeye** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:25 pm

WeekapaugGroove wrote:I hope I eat crow on this but I think a lot of you will be disappointed in what a real trade package will look like if they move Aaron this spring.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

I agree. I was hoping for Jeudy, 2 1sts and 2 2nds, but that is likely too high. Then get a 3rd round comp pick for Adams in 2023.

stillgotgame · Post #177 » by **stillgotgame** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:31 pm

MickeyDavis wrote:We have leverage in that we don't have to trade him. He'd have to play for us or retire. And he'd still be under contract and couldn't come back in a year and go elsewhere.

Obviously we won't do that, we want a return on him and would get nothing if he retires.

I seriously doubt he retires. He picked a bad time to be taking a big chunk of his salary in bitcoin.

https://www.sporttechie.com/aaron-rodgers-relaxes-with-bitcoin-will-convert-large-portion-of-salary-to-the-cryptocurrency

showtimesam · Post #178 » by **showtimesam** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:33 pm

Denver and the Packers are perfect trade partners. They won’t care about trading 3 firsts as part of a package for Rodgers/ Adam’s but we HAVE to get a player or two as well. To me Jeudy is the key player here. The Packers walk away with Jeudy and we have a number one wideout to grow with Love and Dillon. Add in a potential impact wideout at pick 9 and we have an offense we can build on.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

WeekapaugGroove · Post #179 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:38 pm

Reddeye wrote:
WeekapaugGroove wrote:I hope I eat crow on this but I think a lot of you will be disappointed in what a real trade package will look like if they move Aaron this spring.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

I agree. I was hoping for Jeudy, 2 1sts and 2 2nds, but that is likely too high. Then get a 3rd round comp pick for Adams in 2023.

I think they would be fortunate to get the Stafford deal. Obviously Aaron is better but he's 5 years older and part of that Stafford package was payment to take Geoffs contract.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

M-C-G · Post #180 » by **M-C-G** » Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:44 pm

I'm trying to decide if the Rams win the Super Bowl, does that up the value of Rodgers. That would be two consecutive years of teams going 'all in' on a vet QB and winning a championship. Because if that is your plan, I don't think you are going to quibble over the picks all that much and Staffords deal set a floor for Rodgers value IMO.