- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
The argument of trading first rounders for an experienced QB
Posted on 5/6/21 at 7:46 am
Posted on 5/6/21 at 7:46 am
This is a debate I’ve been having with multiple people. With the rumors of Aaron Rodgers wanting out, I’m curious what would be the maximum amount of first rounders you’d be willing to give up? I’ve said if the Packers want 3-4 first rounders + Jameis and/or Taysom I’d do it. I get that the first rounders are valuable. However, you’re taking a gamble that they’d pan out. It’s the same thing that you’d be taking a gamble on Rodgers playing at the same level to bring Atleast one super bowl here. Not to mention our FO has shown in the past to find quality talent in rounds 2-7 over round 1. Just a thought.
Examples:
2007-Robert Meachem
2008- Sedrick Ellis
2010-Patrick Robinson
2013-Kenny Vaccaro
2016-Sheldon Rankins
2018-Marcus Davenport
Examples:
2007-Robert Meachem
2008- Sedrick Ellis
2010-Patrick Robinson
2013-Kenny Vaccaro
2016-Sheldon Rankins
2018-Marcus Davenport
This post was edited on 5/6/21 at 7:52 am
10
Posted on 5/6/21 at 7:54 am to LlyodChristmas
You would give up 3-4 first rounders for a guy who may play 4 more years? I’d give up one first and that would need to be the next years because I know we would be competing for a championship.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 7:59 am to LlyodChristmas
If we were to trade for a QB I wish it would have been Stafford. He's only 33 and probably has 5-6 good years left
Posted on 5/6/21 at 7:59 am to tigersquad89
Ya, u sell the farm if you can become a legit super bowl contender for 3 years.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 8:01 am to LlyodChristmas
Rodgers is liable to retire after this year - I wouldn’t do it
Posted on 5/6/21 at 8:01 am to tigersquad89
That’s part of the risk. I think realistically i see the Packers getting 2-3 firsts and one or two starters from an AFC Team (Raiders, Broncos, and Dolphins come to mind)
Posted on 5/6/21 at 8:02 am to imAMAZING
quote:
If we were to trade for a QB I wish it would have been Stafford. He's only 33 and probably has 5-6 good years left
Him or Wilson tbh
Posted on 5/6/21 at 8:08 am to LlyodChristmas
How many teams have won two Super Bowls? It’s the ultimate goal and it brings in the money.
Ya, u give up first rounders if u think it will get you there.
Ya, u give up first rounders if u think it will get you there.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:00 am to LlyodChristmas
It's obvious that the sure thing (vet QB) is better than the unknown (draft pick). And, I think the age of the QB will also play into the price; you may have to give up more for a Watson (pre controversy) or Wilson, than you would for a Rogers. I think a trade for Rogers would be worth 2 1st, a vet starter, and a conditional 3rd pick that could turn into a 1st based on contract extensions.
But, to argue your point. For all of the misses that you listed, they have had some hits in the 1st round:
2006-Reggie
2009-Jenkins (although, he was a bigger hit for Philly, but still rated properly as a 1st)
2011-Cam & Ingram
2014-Cooks
2015-Peat (can be argued either way)
2017-Latt
2017-Ram
2020-Ruiz (verdict still out due to last season, but I think he will end up falling under the hit list)
2015-Anthony (you missed him as the biggest 1st round miss by this FO)
And, other than Anthony, the names you listed turned out to be quality players/starters; just not worth their 1st round price tag. Ironically, if they were 2nd & 3rd round picks; the picks would be viewed as quality value.
But, to argue your point. For all of the misses that you listed, they have had some hits in the 1st round:
2006-Reggie
2009-Jenkins (although, he was a bigger hit for Philly, but still rated properly as a 1st)
2011-Cam & Ingram
2014-Cooks
2015-Peat (can be argued either way)
2017-Latt
2017-Ram
2020-Ruiz (verdict still out due to last season, but I think he will end up falling under the hit list)
2015-Anthony (you missed him as the biggest 1st round miss by this FO)
And, other than Anthony, the names you listed turned out to be quality players/starters; just not worth their 1st round price tag. Ironically, if they were 2nd & 3rd round picks; the picks would be viewed as quality value.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 9:55 am to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
It's obvious that the sure thing (vet QB) is better than the unknown (draft pick). And, I think the age of the QB will also play into the price; you may have to give up more for a Watson (pre controversy) or Wilson, than you would for a Rogers. I think a trade for Rogers would be worth 2 1st, a vet starter, and a conditional 3rd pick that could turn into a 1st based on contract extensions.
But, to argue your point. For all of the misses that you listed, they have had some hits in the 1st round:
2006-Reggie
2009-Jenkins (although, he was a bigger hit for Philly, but still rated properly as a 1st)
2011-Cam & Ingram
2014-Cooks
2015-Peat (can be argued either way)
2017-Latt
2017-Ram
2020-Ruiz (verdict still out due to last season, but I think he will end up falling under the hit list)
2015-Anthony (you missed him as the biggest 1st round miss by this FO)
And, other than Anthony, the names you listed turned out to be quality players/starters; just not worth their 1st round price tag. Ironically, if they were 2nd & 3rd round picks; the picks would be viewed as quality value.
I agree with all this. In the end it’s a risk either way. You have an above-average-to-super bowl contending roster right now. Why not cash in on a QB you’d imagine will be playing at the same level for the next 3-4 seasons?
Posted on 5/6/21 at 10:56 am to tigersquad89
Trying to buy a Superbowl by acquiring an aging star who only has a few good years left by trading picks (Brady; Manning) and giving up a ton of picks to move up and grab a promising prospect in the draft are both High Risk-High Reward moves, and you'd better get it right or you screw your franchise for years.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 11:16 am to LlyodChristmas
It really depends on how "ready" the team is to make a SB run. Rodgers is a sure thing and has another 3-5 years left. If you are drafting bottom 1st every year and have the cap situation well managed, he's easily worth 3 1sts.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 11:46 am to LlyodChristmas
I’ll ask you the same question to the people that talk about wanting to ‘tank’ for a high draft pick.... have you ever seen an example of a team doing this, then wind up being better in the long run?? I can’t think of a good example of a team unloading 3-4 1st round picks and being BETTER after
If you can give me a few examples of it being beneficial, I’d be on board... but dumping a ton of assets and also tanking for one draft pick just seems like a horrible idea for the long run
If you can give me a few examples of it being beneficial, I’d be on board... but dumping a ton of assets and also tanking for one draft pick just seems like a horrible idea for the long run
This post was edited on 5/6/21 at 11:47 am
Posted on 5/6/21 at 2:15 pm to tigersquad89
You trade for Rodgers everytime.
He fixes so many problems.
He fixes so many problems.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 2:43 pm to LlyodChristmas
Has it dawned on anyone that SP might actually believe in JW? It's not like they just re-signed him for the hell of it. As I noted in another post, JW's interceptions could be cut in half simply by fixing his tendency to pat the ball before throwing. I personally am anxious to see what he can do. We already have a QB that's proven he can throw for over 5,000 yards, and he's YOUNG. Be patient and give him a chance. If he flames out, then we'll pick a QB with a high pick next year. It'll all work out.
This post was edited on 5/6/21 at 3:05 pm
Posted on 5/6/21 at 2:47 pm to Laman1978
The amount of people willing to give up 4 first round picks for an old QB is mind blowing.
OP listed a bunch of our poorer picks. But you can look at guys like ramczyk and Lattimore. This team could add Rodgers and would not win a championship without those guys
OP listed a bunch of our poorer picks. But you can look at guys like ramczyk and Lattimore. This team could add Rodgers and would not win a championship without those guys
This post was edited on 5/6/21 at 2:53 pm
Posted on 5/6/21 at 3:07 pm to tigersquad89
quote:Exactly! I would make that trade for a surefire QB in the draft or a proven vet in his 20s (maybe early 30s), but AR will soon be on the decline. Not everyone is Tom f***ing Brady.
The amount of people willing to give up 4 first round picks for an old QB is mind blowing.
Posted on 5/6/21 at 3:14 pm to Laman1978
Tampas situation is also different
They legit gave up nothing for him, got to fill the team up with draft picks, and vets came flocking for cheap.
Now if you're giving up 4 1sts, you'd start talking to Seattle and Houston. Those qbs give you 5+ years
They legit gave up nothing for him, got to fill the team up with draft picks, and vets came flocking for cheap.
Now if you're giving up 4 1sts, you'd start talking to Seattle and Houston. Those qbs give you 5+ years
Posted on 5/6/21 at 3:43 pm to LlyodChristmas
you also have to factor in salary- Rodgers is due over $50 million between the '22 &'23 seasons.
By comparison Burrow over 4 years only gets $36 million
By comparison Burrow over 4 years only gets $36 million
Posted on 5/6/21 at 4:23 pm to Laman1978
quote:
Has it dawned on anyone that SP might actually believe in JW?
In a word... no, no it hasn't. Some people on here are so sure he's going to suck that they've convinced themselves that CSP is engaging in some kind of long-con head fake with Winston.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News