You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Trading down - rumor
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
msmre


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 20292
Location: Chicago, IL
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 5:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

planc33 wrote:
MadWisconian wrote:
Quote:
He is certainly not a top 3 LB. Being a good LB has more to do with making "Big Plays". Barnett still has proven to be a playmaker. He makes the tackles and plays well, but he is not a game changing LB.


I agree he's not a top 3 LB, not a top 10 LB for that matter, but alot of that has to do with supporting cast.

What do you think of Lavar Arington? He's likely to be available trade wise. Would you go get him? He's somewhat a freelancer, which is why he's constantly in Gregg Williams' doghouse, but he's a game changing LB.


yeah, he is an athletic freak and a game changer. the only problem is that he can change the game for the good and the bad. I do not want that type of uncertainty on our team. Look at the blueprint that the Patriots have given us. Eleven average men playing as one is more impressive than having a couple of so called "game changers"


Look at the Patriots D. They have a #4 pick in McGinnest and a #6 in Seymour and Ty Warren a #13 pick. They also have 2 other 1st rounders starting on their D. Additonally, they have 3 starting on their offense as well. The idea that they are nobodies is a myth. They have serious talent and do not waste picks. This compares to GB where there are 2, count them 2, starting 1st rounders on Defense and 2 starting on offense.

The model is to take care of your stars and sign solid veteran compliments to them.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
msmre


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 20292
Location: Chicago, IL
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MadWisconian wrote:
Quote:
Eleven average men playing as one is more impressive than having a couple of so called "game changers"


That's hardly the case. I wouldn't call them average. There are a number of guys on that defense which are pretty good.

Quote:
If he restructured, I would.


In what way or to what degree? Also, what would you be willing to give them for him. He's not likely to come cheap.


I would trade a 4th next year and Diggs for him and give him 2.5M per year.

I think that they would take that. They only way to do it salary cap wise is to include a player.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
planc33


Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 138
Location: Barnes, Wi
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MadWisconian wrote:
Quote:
Eleven average men playing as one is more impressive than having a couple of so called "game changers"


That's hardly the case. I wouldn't call them average. There are a number of guys on that defense which are pretty good.

Quote:
If he restructured, I would.


In what way or to what degree? Also, what would you be willing to give them for him. He's not likely to come cheap.


Dude, you are misssing the point. Of course no one in the NFL is average. But some are better that others.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
planc33


Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 138
Location: Barnes, Wi
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

msmre wrote:
planc33 wrote:
MadWisconian wrote:
Quote:
He is certainly not a top 3 LB. Being a good LB has more to do with making "Big Plays". Barnett still has proven to be a playmaker. He makes the tackles and plays well, but he is not a game changing LB.


I agree he's not a top 3 LB, not a top 10 LB for that matter, but alot of that has to do with supporting cast.

What do you think of Lavar Arington? He's likely to be available trade wise. Would you go get him? He's somewhat a freelancer, which is why he's constantly in Gregg Williams' doghouse, but he's a game changing LB.


yeah, he is an athletic freak and a game changer. the only problem is that he can change the game for the good and the bad. I do not want that type of uncertainty on our team. Look at the blueprint that the Patriots have given us. Eleven average men playing as one is more impressive than having a couple of so called "game changers"


Look at the Patriots D. They have a #4 pick in McGinnest and a #6 in Seymour and Ty Warren a #13 pick. They also have 2 other 1st rounders starting on their D. Additonally, they have 3 starting on their offense as well. The idea that they are nobodies is a myth. They have serious talent and do not waste picks. This compares to GB where there are 2, count them 2, starting 1st rounders on Defense and 2 starting on offense.

The model is to take care of your stars and sign solid veteran compliments to them.


Amen brother. Barnett is one of our stars
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
msmre


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 20292
Location: Chicago, IL
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

planc33 wrote:
msmre wrote:
planc33 wrote:
MadWisconian wrote:
Quote:
He is certainly not a top 3 LB. Being a good LB has more to do with making "Big Plays". Barnett still has proven to be a playmaker. He makes the tackles and plays well, but he is not a game changing LB.


I agree he's not a top 3 LB, not a top 10 LB for that matter, but alot of that has to do with supporting cast.

What do you think of Lavar Arington? He's likely to be available trade wise. Would you go get him? He's somewhat a freelancer, which is why he's constantly in Gregg Williams' doghouse, but he's a game changing LB.


yeah, he is an athletic freak and a game changer. the only problem is that he can change the game for the good and the bad. I do not want that type of uncertainty on our team. Look at the blueprint that the Patriots have given us. Eleven average men playing as one is more impressive than having a couple of so called "game changers"


Look at the Patriots D. They have a #4 pick in McGinnest and a #6 in Seymour and Ty Warren a #13 pick. They also have 2 other 1st rounders starting on their D. Additonally, they have 3 starting on their offense as well. The idea that they are nobodies is a myth. They have serious talent and do not waste picks. This compares to GB where there are 2, count them 2, starting 1st rounders on Defense and 2 starting on offense.

The model is to take care of your stars and sign solid veteran compliments to them.


Amen brother. Barnett is one of our stars


Wow, you are missing the point. The Patriots have a bunch of stars on their defense. 3 top 15 picks.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
planc33


Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 138
Location: Barnes, Wi
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

msmre wrote:
planc33 wrote:
msmre wrote:
planc33 wrote:
MadWisconian wrote:
Quote:
He is certainly not a top 3 LB. Being a good LB has more to do with making "Big Plays". Barnett still has proven to be a playmaker. He makes the tackles and plays well, but he is not a game changing LB.


I agree he's not a top 3 LB, not a top 10 LB for that matter, but alot of that has to do with supporting cast.

What do you think of Lavar Arington? He's likely to be available trade wise. Would you go get him? He's somewhat a freelancer, which is why he's constantly in Gregg Williams' doghouse, but he's a game changing LB.


yeah, he is an athletic freak and a game changer. the only problem is that he can change the game for the good and the bad. I do not want that type of uncertainty on our team. Look at the blueprint that the Patriots have given us. Eleven average men playing as one is more impressive than having a couple of so called "game changers"


Look at the Patriots D. They have a #4 pick in McGinnest and a #6 in Seymour and Ty Warren a #13 pick. They also have 2 other 1st rounders starting on their D. Additonally, they have 3 starting on their offense as well. The idea that they are nobodies is a myth. They have serious talent and do not waste picks. This compares to GB where there are 2, count them 2, starting 1st rounders on Defense and 2 starting on offense.

The model is to take care of your stars and sign solid veteran compliments to them.


Amen brother. Barnett is one of our stars


Wow, you are missing the point. The Patriots have a bunch of stars on their defense. 3 top 15 picks.


No, the point was about Barnett. And he is a first round pick
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SterlingSharpe


Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Posts: 1957
Location: Frisco, Texas
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good stuff back & forth there Fellas, but the bottom line we all can agree on is that Mike Sherman the GM, from 2000-2004, was terrible, and didn't put much talent onto this roster. Not just taking a PUNTER in round three either.

The cupboards are pretty bare, or generic to say the least. I still don't know why he got fooled into taking the less pure WR in Robert Ferguson instead of the fluid, natural Chris Chambers. Sometimes, a lot of times, these geniuses overrate size, and discount performance and skill.

I'd trade Diggs and a 5th rounder for Arrington on a HEARTBEAT. That guy is top 10 talent. If it doesn't work out, we let him go after 2006 with not much lost. But it might pay big dividends.
_________________


Hilarious Skit! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNNiFaENUow&search=monkey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
msmre


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 20292
Location: Chicago, IL
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SterlingSharpe wrote:
Good stuff back & forth there Fellas, but the bottom line we all can agree on is that Mike Sherman the GM, from 2000-2004, was terrible, and didn't put much talent onto this roster. Not just taking a PUNTER in round three either.

The cupboards are pretty bare, or generic to say the least. I still don't know why he got fooled into taking the less pure WR in Robert Ferguson instead of the fluid, natural Chris Chambers. Sometimes, a lot of times, these geniuses overrate size, and discount performance and skill.

I'd trade Diggs and a 5th rounder for Arrington on a HEARTBEAT. That guy is top 10 talent. If it doesn't work out, we let him go after 2006 with not much lost. But it might pay big dividends.


I like it and since they trade him to us, if he does not work out, we can cut him with NO financial ramifications (i.e. when you trade someone, you recognize their amortized bonus immediately).
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
planc33


Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 138
Location: Barnes, Wi
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SterlingSharpe wrote:
Good stuff back & forth there Fellas, but the bottom line we all can agree on is that Mike Sherman the GM, from 2000-2004, was terrible, and didn't put much talent onto this roster. Not just taking a PUNTER in round three either.

The cupboards are pretty bare, or generic to say the least. I still don't know why he got fooled into taking the less pure WR in Robert Ferguson instead of the fluid, natural Chris Chambers. Sometimes, a lot of times, these geniuses overrate size, and discount performance and skill.

I'd trade Diggs and a 5th rounder for Arrington on a HEARTBEAT. That guy is top 10 talent. If it doesn't work out, we let him go after 2006 with not much lost. But it might pay big dividends.


Great post. I appreciate you appreciating the back and forth. There is not enough of it going aroung this site. There is too much "I am right". I agree your assesment of Shermans draft skills and I agree with you that Arrrington is worth the risk. Top 10 skills??? I sure hope so if we sign him. He hasn't shown top 10 skills yet, but he is definately worth the risk. Lets all remember that the guy is a clubhouse liability.


Last edited by planc33 on Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MadWisconian


Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 1685
Location: Washington, D.C.
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I would trade a 4th next year and Diggs for him and give him 2.5M per year.

I think that they would take that. They only way to do it salary cap wise is to include a player.


You'll never get him out of Washington for a 4th rounder and a mediocre LB. Some team out there will give up a late 1st or early 2nd round pick for him.

Would you give up our 2nd round pick?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
msmre


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 20292
Location: Chicago, IL
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MadWisconian wrote:
Quote:
I would trade a 4th next year and Diggs for him and give him 2.5M per year.

I think that they would take that. They only way to do it salary cap wise is to include a player.


You'll never get him out of Washington for a 4th rounder and a mediocre LB. Some team out there will give up a late 1st or early 2nd round pick for him.

Would you give up our 2nd round pick?


How do you figure? They do not want him there. He does not want to be there.

On top of it. Moving players has not yielded high picks in a very long time. Certainly not a player who did not start last year.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
planc33


Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 138
Location: Barnes, Wi
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MadWisconian wrote:
Quote:
I would trad e a 4th next year and Diggs for him and give him 2.5M per year.

I think that they would take that. They only way to do it salary cap wise is to include a player.


You'll never get him out of Washington for a 4th rounder and a mediocre LB. Some team out there will give up a late 1st or early 2nd round pick for him.

Would you give up our 2nd round pick?



Your quote is right, and I think Washington wants to leave Arrington in the past. The guy is an enigma, much like T.O. Million dollar body, ten cent head, Al Davis would trade for him. Gotta love theAl Davis factor. As for the draft, I would never give up the second round pick. The second and third rounds are where drafts are made
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
planc33


Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 138
Location: Barnes, Wi
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

did msmre and me just agree???
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MadWisconian


Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 1685
Location: Washington, D.C.
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Arrington signed an 8 year 68 million dollar contract in 2003, so maybe you can get him for less than a 2nd round pick if a trade significantly helps the Redskins capwise. But I also don't see Arrington signing a contract for 2.5 million if he's making a base of 5.5 million.

If you accept him under his current deal, you have him locked up through 2011. I guess the question is, do you want to pay him 5.5 million.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Packersshame


Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 897
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2006 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think one thing we need to considers with the Packers is overall talent level.

Right now, I think we are in low tier talent vs NFL teams. Not the worst, but one of ten worst.

A good indicator of how good your talent base and how well you draft is special teams. Generally deep teams have very good special teams units have good players playing special teams...and right now our special teams are pretty bad overall.

We are also have some age at key positions, though TT did a good job drafting last year to help alleave that.

Honestely, with level of talent we have and depth at postions of need for us in this draft, trading down is best idea unless you take Mario Williams.

I love AJ Hawk and I think he will be solid LB and have some pro bowl years (think Dan Morgan minus the injuries) but he is second coming of LT or Ray Lewis. GM's like him because he is a very safe, low risk pick...but has upside is not that high for some taken at 5.

Mario on other hand has the tools to be elite pass rusher in mold of Peppers of Shaun Rogers.

If we can trade down to 12-14, and pick up 2nd rounder and 4th rounder, it would be nice move for us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group