Trade for Hakeem Nicks

Ain't gonna happen no way no how.  With Sherrod looking like he is ready to return and possibly Tretter and/or Worthy there are not enough guys to release to make room for Nicks too. Unless you trade an active player for Nicks, but who would that be. Who can the Packers live without?

 

Just saw the signing of Chris Harper.  Now I know this will never happen.

 

How exactly did not getting Lynch burn the Packers? They won the SB that season.

Why stop there. Let's trade for Peyton Manning to put a little pressure on ARodge.

If a Lombardi trophy is the result of being burned by not pulling the trigger then brother, strike a match and call 911.

 

Replacing injured WR's by spending draft picks to rent an injury prone WR (he's never played a full season in 5 years) is bad business. The next 8 weeks are going to be a tough road but GB has now told THEIR guy's you're here for a reason. We expect you to carry on and win. GB doesn't draft players thinking they carry trade value. They draft them to play football in GB.

 

C'mon man. Stay calm.

jesus ****....the disease of dip****itis runs rampant

 

trade Rodgers for Jay Cutler. 

Dude!  A 4.63 40 ain't all that fast.  I would not trade any of our top three WR for this guy.  Your statement is a bit disrespectful to our receivers.  Sheet, our receivers were the only group that made Matt Flynn look good.  Next man up. 

You guys act as if there's a trade scenario involving the Packers that doesn't involve Joe Thomas---sheesh.

6.0 ft, 210 - not all that big either.

Re: Marshawn - We did win the SB that year but over the past 2 years Lynch has averaged 1400 yards and 12 TDS. We would not have had to draft 2 RBs if we had given up a 3rd rounder for him.

Nicks is a stud, he has killed the Packers and would be a good addition. I love our guys too and am not saying to trade one of them for him. Just trade a 3rd round pick that would not help this year anyway to get a player who could help put us in an even better position to contend this year.

In one breadth guys say "why not trade for Manning" and in another that he isn't even a top WR, which is it? I would rather have Hakeem Nicks for the rest of the year for $1.7 than a 3rd rounder in the 2014 draft, that's really what it comes down too IMO>

Hey, c'mon! Don't underestimate Jay.   He's a new man, seems to have a new attitude

about life and football.   Maybe getting married and having a baby has made him more coachable. I really think Trestman has himfigured out.  And I think Jay realizes what it takes to be an elite QB in the NFL.  I actually think Jay would be just finein Green n Gold. Besides, Rodgers' teammates don't like him anyway.  

 

 

I swear to ever lovin' jeebus Spiderman I'm in zero mood for your dumbass logic tonight.

 

Show me Marshawn's ring for all his beast effing ass efforts these past 3 years. Nicks has KILLED GB for 2TD's in one playoff game yet he's on an 0-6 team looking for anyone to toss him a lifeline and you want to OBLIGE HIM??? Just stop man. JUST STOP!!!

 

And what does Breadth mean???

Emote post of the year. 

In Lynch's first year in Seattle, he averaged 3.5 yards a carry.  He did nothing. His high game was 89 yards.  In weeks 5-16 with Seattle he produced 573 yards.  In those same weeks Brandon Jackson produced 566 yards.  I think your assumption that the Packers kept him on the roster following that 2010 season is a flawed one.  Perhaps they would have, perhaps they wouldn't have.  What you don't know is what impact he would have, if any, on the locker room, on the playcalling, and if they won the Super Bowl with him.

 

Next, to keep Lynch in your "ZOMG WE DON'T NEED TO DRAFT 2 RBs THIS YEAR" scenario, the Seahawks had to sign him to a 4/31 deal.  Who are you cutting to keep Lynch at that price?  Do we still have James Jones?  Jordy?  CMIII?  AR?  Shields?  Williams?  Sitton?  Jolly?  Hawk?

 

This isn't fantasy football, Lynch would have cost a significant amount of dough, and we'd be missing a significant piece of the team elsewhere.

 

As for Hicks, does he make this a Super Bowl team this year?  I don't think he changes that outcome at all.  He isn't that great, he sucked last year, he's sucked this year, he's consistently injured, and he weakens our ability to draft players or move up trade next year.  It's nothing but short term thinking by armchair GMs.  Nicks isn't worth a 5th round pick, let alone a 3rd.  

If Nicks came here it wouldn't be if he'd get hurt, it would be when. My god they've already had to resort to stacking the training tables like bunk beds the way it is. They're cramming so many players into the ice tubs the trainer's room is beginning to look like a swingers club. But let's trade for an oft injured WR anyway. 

pbiderman1, you still have not told me who you drop from the current 53 to make room for Nicks. And then for Sherrod when he comes off PUP. And then Tretter when he comes off PUP.  I want answers.

#1 reason not to make any trades for a veteran player, salary cap.

The cap under the new CBA is different from past years. I have seen reports that  the new cap is some kind of 3 year average. That means that any left over cap space from the two previous years are rolled over into the 3rd year or something like that. I have not seen a good explanation yet as how  the new cap system works.

The Packers are going to need all the cap space they can create to sign their own free agents next year.

1. Don't read his posts.

 

2. How large are team rosters?  I reject ANY logic that requires seeing Lynch's ring.  Teams win championships.

 

3. Pot calling kettle.

I assume we are trading our 2011 offensive line for the Seahawks offensive line in this scenerio as well?  

 

How many grills does Marshawn have?  Is that a better question?  

 

I said it earlier, I'd trade a 5th for Nicks.  I think wide receivers can adjust to scheme easier than some other positions.  I wouldn't go higher, doubt Ted would either.  I'm guessing since he name has come up in connection to Green Bay, he'll break his hand this weekend.  

Nicks is BEGGING Giant management to Not trade him anywhere until he gets his this week against the terrible Vikes secondary.....

But that's just it- Thompson values draft picks more than rental players. And Hakeem Nicks is a walking injury waiting to happen. Eeven if Thompson was willing to, Nicks wouldn't be the guy to pick. Great player when he's on the field, made of glass. So your primise flies against the MO of the guy who built the team's roster, and it involves a guy that isn't very durable on a roster full of injured players. Pretty must a waste of time to consider, don't ya think?

And as others have already pointed out, the roster is already jammed with players that are coming back from injuries. Face it- the offense will be OK for the next several weeks with what they have. This team will win because of defense anyway, not with anything the O can or cannot do. And when they get these weapons back, it'll be a pretty good show.

You'd have a much better case for that move if the Packers didn't have a running game. AR and MM will adjust and having people to get the ball to won't be a problem. Being down to just Palmer and Mulumba is more of a concern to me.

I don't see TT trading for a guy like Nicks that he wouldn't expect to be on the roster long-term.  

 

Biggest concern is upsetting the contract balance TT has in place with Jones and Jordy.  

Add in the other question marks deftly listed above and its no go.  

 

As far as Lynch and his supposed future with the Packers, the Packers just this year put the resources into rounding out the offense and developing a running game.  He may have looked like Cedric Benson.

 

JPeterman can handle it.  He's an aspiring writer, it's good to spend time amongst the jackals for seasoning.  Posting on x4 is like a journalistic internship.

Iowacheese,

 

That gave me a chuckle - good one!

It would be cheaper to bring in Koren Robinson. He has the size and is a proven commodity.

I too think this is a bigger concern. 

he would be the #1 receiver on the Packers

I have 3 statements for you....

1. No he wouldn't
2. The Packers have 4 - #1 receivers when healthy. You trying to say James Jones wouldn't start for any of the other 31 teams?
3. See statement #1

 

Not to mention the guy is injured ALL the time. 

 

Like the GM's say...."Where does this stuff come from?!?!"

The thing of it is, if TT pulled this trade off tomorrow all you naysayers in this thread would be calling him a genius....just saying

No doubt.

For Nicks?  I hope not.  I'm not even sure how I would feel about throwing away a 7th for him.

Youre right, we would.  But fact is, it won't happen.  There is a reason mid season trades rarely happen in the NFL and even more rare is when they lead to a Super Bowl.  When was the last mid season trade that had any significance in the NFL in that season?  When has a mid season trade actually changed the landscape of Super Bowl contenders. Yeah Lynch was a good trade for Seattle but in theory they could have signed him as a free agent the year after the trade and been just as well off (while keeping those draft picks).  It's not as easy as just plugging players into a new system and expecting them to perform as they did on their previous team.  Schemes, play books, QB tendencies, etc. are very different team to team.  You can dumb down a play book for a new player but does that help the team?  

 

But carry on, armchair GM's.  Threads like this always make things interesting on these forms.  

The Donkeys just released Tavarres King. Lol. Will they go after him? 

King was played for a fool. I'd be pissed if the team worked hard to deny me a chance at an NFL career.

quote:

The thing of it is, if TT pulled this trade off tomorrow all you naysayers in this thread would be calling him a genius....just saying

Go post the links to the threads in which people called TT a genius for signing Jeff Saturday.

Excellent post.