1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Jermichael Finley for Chris Johnson

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by FrankRizzo, Oct 9, 2012.

?

Would you trade Finley right now for Chris Johnson?

  1. Hell yes, a lethal threat at RB in, and remove the attitude of Jermike? Do it now

    35.7%
  2. No way! too much $ for a RB, and this offense doesn't need a RB that badly anyway

    64.3%
  1. Vltrophy
    Offline

    Vltrophy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    3,482
    Ratings Received:
    +359 / 28 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1996
    No CJ. TT would not want his huge contract. His attitude is not much better if any from Finley
  2. Aaron rodgers is god
    Offline

    Aaron rodgers is god Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    786
    Location:
    Kenosha WISCONSIN
    Ratings Received:
    +154 / 9 / -2
    Get 1 bad attitude for another and pay more money for that bad attitude. No thanks. Why even trade for CJ? He got his money and stopped trying. Was only motivated to do really good because he wanted to get payed.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Chicocheese
    Offline

    Chicocheese Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    572
    Location:
    Chico, Ca.
    Ratings Received:
    +198 / 12 / -1
    Packer Fan Since:
    1994
    Well, option 3 isn't on the board, but that is what I would pick.

    1)Chris Johnson has a bigger attitude than Finley.

    2)He isn't producing, and hasn't in a while.

    3) We haven't given Alex Green a real fair shake yet. Lets see what he does!

    4) Maybe James Starks will do what needs to be done, if Green doesn't.
  4. melvin dangerr
    Offline

    melvin dangerr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    317
    Ratings Received:
    +87 / 10 / -2
    Packer Fan Since:
    1966
    Somewhere out there, is a bull of a running back waiting for some green and maybe GOLD..and not in his mouth..hope we can find him..
  5. weeds
    Offline

    weeds Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,909
    Location:
    42 minutes south of Lambeau
    Ratings Received:
    +918 / 16 / -9
    Frank, I'd so NO and leave it at that - no qualification and no rationalization.

    This offense isn't geared toward ANY running game and honestly, it drives me nuts. Be it McCarthy's pass-first preference, the use of the watered down zone blocking scheme (which I despise) or a finesse O-line ... I'm of the opinion that the Pack could have the 9'ers O-line and still not establish a credible run game. Putting a prima donna marquis running back in the Packers backfield is like trying to find the clean end of a turd.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. M&MCheesehead
    Offline

    M&MCheesehead Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    5
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    someone mentioned any other trade senarios, I know the Browns would never go for it even though they could use a decent TE, Finley and Newhouse for Joe Thomas.
  7. Pack93z
    Offline

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Location:
    Central Wisconsin
    Ratings Received:
    +22 / 0 / -0
    No.. not because I think Johnson is done physically.. because I think mentally he has crapped out.

    1. 2000 yards went to his head.

    2. He is running scared.. last Thursday night was the best he has ran this season, but even then he was shying away from contact. The Packers don't grade open lanes.. they flash and then close, you have to be decisive in your read. Johnson isn't that right now.. and to be honest, don't know that it is coming back.

    3. He has already cashed in, since he held out and signed his payday.. he just has not been the same.

    4. I really don't know how much upstairs he can handle, in a offense like ours, I lack the confidence that he can pick the offense up.

    IMO, even with Finley struggling to produce, he still would offer more value to our passing game than Johnson would add to our offense.

    So again.. Not for me.
  8. MLB
    Offline

    MLB Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 4, 2012
    Messages:
    53
    Ratings Received:
    +14 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1957
    That would be great.

    I would even be willing to throw in Greg Jennings just to get Thomas...if he would agree to a long-term deal.

    Crazy?

    Maybe not:

    - Has Marshall Newhouse proven he is capable in run-blocking and pass protection?

    - Should we continue to tolerate Jermichael Finley being "Jermichael Finley"?

    ....and....

    - Can't our offense excel without Greg Jennings (6 TDs vs. Houston!), especially in view of the fact that he's missing more games of late AND we might not be able to re-sign him in the off-$$eason?

    I know this "three-for-one" suggestion might seem unreasonable on the surface, but I'd make this trade....providing Joe Thomas is 100% healthy and signs a long-term deal with us at the time of the transaction.

    I believe Joe Thomas is a "stud" OL. His addition would better protect A-Rod, as well as improve our running game.

    Am I crazy for making this trade proposal?
  9. mradtke66
    Offline

    mradtke66 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +116 / 8 / -0
    I'm generally a fan of Finley, though even he's starting to get on my nerves a bit this year. For "all" of his drops, he has the same number as Nelson.

    Now then, getting Joe Thomas. I would give them Jennings, Finley, Newhouse, and our 1st round pick. That still might not be enough for Cleveland to actually give him up. He's that complete of a player. I'm not sure what else I'd be willing to part with to sweeten the pot further.

    Of course, I don't know if we could afford Thomas long term. Or if Cleveland could absorb the accelerated cap hit. He did just sign a big contract.

    To your other points, Newhouse has actually proven to be a good pass blocker. PFF has him as the 5th best pass blocking LT. Run blocking, not so much.
  10. FrankRizzo
    Offline

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,607
    Location:
    Dallas
    Ratings Received:
    +1,575 / 57 / -28
    Packer Fan Since:
    1969
    I saw that, very impressive.
    And so far he's played against: Julius Peppers, Alden Smith/Justin Smith, Dwight Freeney. Not bad.
    But he gets Jared Allen 2 times in December.... if both guys are still healthy then.... but for real, when was the last time Jared Allen got hurt? He never gets hurt.
  11. MLB
    Offline

    MLB Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 4, 2012
    Messages:
    53
    Ratings Received:
    +14 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1957
    I would do my "three-for-one" as described above, but to add our first-rounder next year to the deal? I'm not sure about that, unless Cleveland would add their 2nd- or 3rd-rounder next year to the mix.
  12. Alex
    Offline

    Alex Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    406
    Location:
    Eden Prairie, MN
    Ratings Received:
    +213 / 6 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    I'd rather go after Ben Tate than Chris Johnson. Won't happen either way
  13. ivo610
    Offline

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    14,772
    Location:
    Madison
    Ratings Received:
    +3,427 / 81 / -25
    Trades like that don't happen. It's more of a baseball basketball thing.

    Even so, the browns wait a year and they could acquire 2 of those players without giving up anything.

    Ever try to sell something quality and someone offers you a bunch of half *** things in a trade? I sell game worn football items sometimes and will frequently get an email from someone trying to trade 9 items for my 1 item.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. mradtke66
    Offline

    mradtke66 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +116 / 8 / -0
    But that's the rub. Thomas is easily worth those 4 things I would be willing to offer and probably more. He's probably the best in the league at his position. At worst, he's 1B. Newhouse is overall around 15th best, Jennings around 10th but injured and aging. Finley, on paper, is about the 3rd best tight end, but he's under performed this year. That's a terrible trade for Thomas. We'd need the 1 just get them talking.

    Now, having Cleveland throw in their 2nd? That makes the trade even worse than the 3 for 1 trade you mention. Projecting what I see happening, Packers will pick late in the round, Cleveland early. Our 1st won't be much more valuable than their 2nd, which makes sense, as they'll probably only be ~12 picks apart or less. (I'm presuming the Packers make the playoffs, with their pick no earlier than 26 and the Browns being terrible, with a pick around 4 again.)

    I figure the best we could do would be to give them the three players, our 1st round pick, and swap 3rds. Your proposal has much more in common with, "I'll give you our backup punter that has a bad ACL for your all Pro Left Tackle" than a real trade.
  15. Oshkoshpackfan
    Offline

    Oshkoshpackfan USMC4EVER

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    2,742
    Location:
    Camp Lejeune NC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,137 / 72 / -13
    Packer Fan Since:
    1981
    WOW...that is some awfully friendly paper then..lol
    Better than finley: Gronkowski, Hernandez, Gonzalez,Whiten, Vernon davis, Jimmy graham, owen danials, J gresham, Heath miller, Greg olson......

    I might be friendly enough to put him at between 12th-15th best, but nowhere near the top.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. mradtke66
    Offline

    mradtke66 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +116 / 8 / -0
    Running down the stats in 2011 (among TEs)

    3rd in TDs
    6th in yards per catch
    13th in yards
    16th in YAC


    Those stats tell me he did meh on quantity stats, but did well on on quality stats. It's not unlike the Brees vs. Rodgers comparison from last year. Brees had yardage (quantity stat) but Rodgers had better yards per attempt (quality stat).

    Similarly impressive, he was 11th among all pass catchers for Touchdowns. (If you just put Finley on the WR list, he's tied at 9th with big names such as Fitzgerald, White, etc. Obviously, we also have to put the 2 TEs that topped Finley on that list to be fair.)

    The tight ends that rank higher that Finley are Gronk and Graham.

    That's why I'd say he's 3rd best on paper. Now, if he could fix his drops, he'd be great again.
  17. mradtke66
    Offline

    mradtke66 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +116 / 8 / -0
    Also, Finley is still young at 24. You can fix a lot of "youthful stupidity" with that much time in front of you.
  18. MLB
    Offline

    MLB Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 4, 2012
    Messages:
    53
    Ratings Received:
    +14 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1957
    I'm more concerned with his "mouth" than his "drops." I'm also wondering if he is (or could become) a "cancer in the locker room."

    You're right to point out that he's only 24.

    He certainly has the body and speed (and I always liked him in the past), but a few of his past public statements, as well as that remark by his agent (concerning Rodgers) might be "red flags." Or, maybe not. Or, maybe he just needs a change of scenery.

    But...let's get back to the most important thing: our Packers-Browns proposal...

    In addition to Jennings, Newhouse, and Finley, we have to also give our 1st next year "just to get them talking"?

    Sure, Joe Thomas is a "stud", but the best at his position? Maybe, but how is that determined, or quantified? And, he is just one player...we'd be giving up three (and only Newhouse is average).

    IMHO, a healthy Jennings might be a stud WR for five years for the Browns (like Gary Collins and Paul Warfield in Browns' past), and a healthy Finley might become the second-best TE in Browns' history. I only suggest trading both because we're so deep at those positions (especially at WR), and because we could really use Thomas.

    If you're fine with our first-rounder next year ... plus Jennings ... plus Finley ... plus Newhouse ... for just Joe Thomas, then I think you are under-valuing GJ and JF.

    Me? I'd do it if we could at least get a high-round pick back from the Browns. Since you made some good points above, I guess I'd settle for a 2nd or a 3rd. I mean, a change of scenery, and Jennings and Finley--with good health and a decent QB--could very well prove to both be "studs" playing for the Browns.

    And who knows regarding future health? Thomas might get banged up playing for us. Then they'll run both of us out of this forum on a rail.

    Anyway...

    OK. In your opinion, what would be the absolute MINIMUM (above scenario) Cleveland would demand for Joe Thomas?

    (And be realistic, or we'll never get TT to do the deal; you know he reads these threads!)
  19. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,471
    Ratings Received:
    +1,699 / 44 / -15
    • MLB asks if he’s crazy for making that trade proposal. IMO he’s not crazy just unrealistic.

    • Ivo610 hit on it regarding numbers: [sarcasm]Hey I know as the Packers free up roster spots by trading three players maybe they could sign three street free agents and trade them too?[/sarcasm]

    • If Finley is the third best TE in the league why would the Packers be trading him?

    • Trades like this are rare in the league. Trading one player with one year left on his contract is difficult. A trade including two or more…

    • The Packers have three relative youngsters at OT: Newhouse who, no matter where exactly he’s ranked has significantly improved this year. Bulaga has had some struggles but I’ll bet they’re still very high on him and before his injury, Sherrod had more potential than Newhouse at LT. Why would Thompson want spend a lot of cap space on OT?

    • What is the last blockbuster trade Ted Thompson has done that didn’t occur on draft day? Ryan Grant for … a sixth rounder?

    • And ya’ll are right about Finley being 24, except he’s 25.
  20. FrankRizzo
    Offline

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,607
    Location:
    Dallas
    Ratings Received:
    +1,575 / 57 / -28
    Packer Fan Since:
    1969
    That's a GIGANTIC "if".
    "If I win the lottery tonight....."

    #1- Gronkowski
    #2- Jimmy Graham
    #3- Vernon Davis

    Nobody, even his agent, believes he is the 3rd best TE in this league.
    Besides those 3 guys, Tony Gonzalez, the big monster Rudolph in Minny..... there are a few others playing better than J-Mike too.
    I'd trade Finley for Aaron Hernandez in a heartbeat as well.
    I'd also trade him for Jared Cook.

    To be honest, I haven't seen Finley run past anyone since his knee injury in 2010. He's not the same guy we remember.
    He doesn't get separation, plus he drops more passes than anyone as we know.
    And then he has the bizarre attitude. No thanks. I defended him all year last year, I realize now the chemistry is better without him. Shoulda had that figured out when we won the Super Bowl with him out of there.
  21. mradtke66
    Offline

    mradtke66 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +116 / 8 / -0
    I'm going to stick close to my original assessment. Right now, none of the three players have that much value.

    1) Jennings. He's 28 right now, right? And he now has an injury history. And, worst of all, he's going to require a rather large contract. Would you place any trade value on a guy that you might not even be able to sign next year? If he is truly the missing piece, maybe, but the Browns are rebuilding.

    2) Newhouse. Fifth round pick, getting better, but they have an all-pro at left tackle. He doesn't add value at all. His only purpose in the trade to make sure the Browns have a viable something to replace Thomas on the roster and on the line.

    3) Finley. He's the one piece that would be interesting. He's young and a special athletic talent, but then there's this year's production. Way, way down. And again, he's a free agent after 2013. How does that contract situation playout?

    Let's compare to Thomas. He's quite possibly the best LT in football. Think of it this way--if you had an expansion team and you could have any LT to build your franchise line around, who would pick? I'd take Thomas. Only other person I'd seriously consider is Jake Long. And both are relatively young. Plus he signed a large contract last year. What kind of accelerate cap hit would Cleveland take?

    Which brings us the the crux of the matter. What do we really have to offer Cleveland?

    Bare minimum, we have to give them a replacement tackle, so I'd let them pick whoever they wanted. Bulaga, Newhouse, Sherrod, they could have one. Remember though, I don't consider whoever to have real value to the trade, just a band-aid move for losing Thomas and I doubt Cleveland would view it differently. Whoever they pick weakens a previous position of strength.

    Next, we'd have to give up our 1st round pick. This is the most valuable thing we really have to offer AND actually be willing to give up. Would you trade Thomas for a late 1st? I wouldn't.

    So just to start the conversation, we need to offer a 1st and a replacement tackle.
  22. mradtke66
    Offline

    mradtke66 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings Received:
    +116 / 8 / -0
    Minor nit. I did not call him the 3rd best this year. I said I would consider him the 3rd best in 2011. This year, not so much. Of course, maybe his drops are an easy fix.

    As far as who I'd rather have or be willing to trade for as an upgrade, I'd need to spend a lot of time just thinking about it. Of course I'd take Gronk in a heartbeat, but you couldn't pay me to take Gonzalez. Too damn old.
  23. ivo610
    Offline

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    14,772
    Location:
    Madison
    Ratings Received:
    +3,427 / 81 / -25
    Few years back he was very close to coming to GB. Makes me wonder how the offense would have looked with tony in it
  24. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,471
    Ratings Received:
    +1,699 / 44 / -15
    Whether or not mradke66 ‘called him the 3rd best’ TE or ‘considers him the 3rd best in 2011’ I sure as hell didn’t. My point (which I think is clear) was for those arguing Finley is the 3rd best TE (or those considering him such), why would the Packers trade such a valuable player? IOW, to counter his point you should quote his post.

    IMO there is no way Thompson is going to trade a first round pick for a player at a position I'll bet he thinks he has covered for the present and the foreseeable future.
  25. FrankRizzo
    Offline

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,607
    Location:
    Dallas
    Ratings Received:
    +1,575 / 57 / -28
    Packer Fan Since:
    1969
    Anybody notice that Johnson went for 200 yards today and 2 TD's?
    All that guy needs is a tiny crease, and he goes.
    When was the last time a Packer RB had 190+ yards rushing?

    We don't need Finley, I do know that. I'd like to cash him in.... he makes $8 mil next year. Money much better spent other ways.

    Put yourself in the shoes of the Packers opposing defensive coordinator if we had Chris Johnson.
    They already don't have enough guys to dedicate a guy to cover the RB if he goes out of the backfield.
    Did you notice Benson was always open for dump offs? So is Alex Green. No not on screens but on drop backs and then check downs.

    If that was CJ2K, those defenses would have to take a guy away to cover him because they do fear his speed.

    That would open things up for the receivers more, plus they'd have to forget about trying to put a spy on Rodgers running.

Share This Page