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.

    Sign Up 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!
    Dismiss Notice

Old topic, Walker gained us how many extra draft picks?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by longtimefan, May 9, 2006.

  1. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,829
    Ratings:
    +3,477
    Packers notes: Walker yields five draft picks
    JASON WILDE
    608-252-6176
    April 30, 2006

    GREEN BAY - Daryn Colledge. Will Blackmon. Ingle Martin. Johnny Jolly. Tyrone Culver.

    They could turn out to be the five- part answer to a nebulous Green Bay Packers' trivia question. Or maybe one or two of them will turn out to be impact players who'll make the whole thing worthwhile.

    For now, though, all they are is what the Packers have to show for trading disgruntled Pro Bowl wide receiver Javon Walker to Denver and the 139th overall pick to Atlanta during the two- day NFL draft.

    "I think it would be unfair to compare these kids to Javon Walker. I'm not saying they are," Packers general manager Ted Thompson said Sunday after the draft ended. "I'm just saying that from a value standpoint, we felt it was a fair trade."

    It all started when Thompson ended the Walker saga by dealing him to the Broncos for a second-round pick (37th overall). After consummating that trade, Thompson packaged the 37th pick with the 139th pick (the Packers' own fifth- round pick) and got the 47th, 93rd and 148th picks from Atlanta.

    Thompson then sent the 93rd pick to St. Louis Saturday night for the 109th and 183rd picks. Thompson then started Sunday's proceedings by sending the 109th pick to Philadelphia for the 115th and 185th picks.

    "I felt like we got fair value in the grand scheme of things, to get an early pick for Javon Walker given the set of circumstances we were under," Thompson said. "Quite frankly, I don't know what happened to that (37th) pick. I know that we traded it and then we drafted some guys and then we traded some other picks."

    Indeed, Thompson ended up with the 47th (Colledge, an offensive lineman from Boise State); 115th (Blackmon, a cornerback/receiver from Boston College), 148th (Martin, a quarterback from Furman), 183rd (Jolly, a defensive tackle from Texas A&M); and 185th (Culver, a safety from Fresno State) picks for Walker.
     
  2. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,829
    Ratings:
    +3,477
    I know there was a debate about this before...Saw this article and I think it explains how it all happened in clear terms..
     
  3. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    But it doesn't account for pick # 139, does it. We didn't get those 5 picks just for pick#37. We got them for picks #37 AND #139.



    I think!
     
  4. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,829
    Ratings:
    +3,477
    After consummating that trade, Thompson packaged the 37th pick with the 139th pick (the Packers' own fifth- round pick) and got the 47th, 93rd and 148th picks from Atlanta.

    But w/o that 37th pick who is to say Atlanta would have made a trade?

    It all started with the Walker trade, and it snowballed no one knows if any of those extras picks could have even happened with out that 1st trade..
     
  5. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1

    Yea ...I realize that but we actually gave up two picks for the 5 guys....Walker and #139.
     
  6. Anubis

    Anubis Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Ratings:
    +0
    What difference does it really make now? :shrug:

    P@ck66:

    This where you jump in and have another hissy fit about how Mike Sherman screwed the team, how TT is screwing the team and how all of this is a grand conspiracy to drive Brett Favre out of Green Bay. :roll:

    GO PACK!!!

    Robert C. Hedley
     
  7. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    It's all on how you look at it. The funny thing is if you look at it from a GB point of view we got 5 picks......but.....If your Denver you only gave up a second.


    People just can't seem to figure it out and want it to look like we got 5 picks for Javon which is simply not true.

    We got a second FOR Javon and then we traded that as well on top of the 139.

    So actually we gave up Javon, a SECOND and a 139 for those five players. Trying to make TT out to be a genius here is a little crazy.

    Let's see how these guys turn out. I honestly don't think that any of those 5 guys will be anything special. Colledge has been getting high praise but will need to learn how to block correctly with proper hip movement to be successful. Blocking guys in the WAC up high may be OK but blocking NFL Calibur players like that is a good way to find yourself on your backside real quick.

    Blackmon may be able to contribute in someway but I'm not sure where. I think Rodgers will win the KR job and the secondary is crowded as it is.

    Martin,Jolly,Culver will contribue nothing. We all love Ingle but he's going to be a 3rd string QB at best. Jolly, Culver will either not make the team or will be allocated or something.

    I know we had to get something from Javon and I think TT tried to do the right thing but fell short when it came to execution. I would have rather used that 2nd round pick on a player that would contribute right away instead of the trading frenzy that will likely yield very little down the road.
     
  8. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
     
  9. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Trade 3: Picks 37 & 139 to ATL for picks 47, 93 & 148.

    Before this trade goes down we are sitting with the 37!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Javon is gone and we have a 2nd. THEN we trade THAT 2ND and THE 139 to Atl. but we still do not have Javon.

    So we gave up JAVON+37+139 for the 5 picks. We just gave Javon to Denver and The 2 picks to ATL.
     
  10. jdlax

    jdlax Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    818
    Ratings:
    +0
    They did not give up both pick #37 and Javon Walker to get those 5 picks. They traded Javon Walker(1 asset) to Denver for pick #37(1 asset). Total number of assets remains the same. Walker and #37 cancelled eachother out. One for the other. They then took pick #37 and pick #139 and turned them into 5 picks. You can either say Walker and #139 got turned into 5 picks, or you can say #37 and #139 got turned into 5 picks, but Walker, #37, and #139 all mentioned together...just isn't right.
     
  11. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    Wrong! Denver Recieved 1 Asset{Jwalk} and Atl recieved 2 assets{37,139}

    This is what we gave for those 5 PICKS!
     
  12. jdlax

    jdlax Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    818
    Ratings:
    +0
    They trade Walker for #37. That's still 1 asset. 1 for 1. Same thing, different color. Since Denver recieved 1 asset and Green Bay recieved 1 asset, you can basically pretend(for numbers' sake) that transaction didn't take place, SINCE IT DIDN'T ALTER THE NUMBER OF ASSETS.




    I hate the word asset now.




    I saw how long you argued with others on this topic.....not me, not today.:)




    See ya.




    :|
     
  13. Cheesehog

    Cheesehog Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    Messages:
    360
    Ratings:
    +0
    It really doesn't matter.
    We would have got nothing had Walker stayed on and sat out until the last few games and be disruptive to the team. Uselessly taking up a roster spot.
    Let alone some of the money we would have to pay him.
    When you look at it that way, everything else is a Bonus.
    And my 2 cents on Walker was always he was a great and talented player. Although he was taller than the others, he seemed very thin and brittle. How healthy he may have been goin in to the season is still a question. I often wondered how he took some of them hits and got up uninjured.
     
  14. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Exactly 1 for 1 - So we got 1 Asset for Javon. Denver gave us 1 pick!

    Then we preceeded to send the new asset and asset 139 for 3 more assets.

    Thus giving away 1 player and 2 Draft picks, 3 total! Denver got 1 and Atlanta got 2.
     
  15. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
     
  16. 4packgirl

    4packgirl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Messages:
    2,415
    Ratings:
    +0
    hallefreakinlujiah to that, cheesey!! let it die people - let it die!!!!! :roll:
     
  17. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    We used Javon to GET the 37th pick. You can't include it like that. What is your problem? It's been laid out NUMEROUS times to you, yet you continue to try an double spend picks an values.

    :roll: :roll: :-?
     
  18. SuperRat

    SuperRat Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Messages:
    617
    Ratings:
    +0
    Javon = 37th pick 37th pick and 139th pick got us 5 picks. The high value of the 37th pick (Walker) allowed TT to do what he did. Thus Walker plus pick 139 got 5 picks. Nobody is trying to say that Walker was traded to Denver for 5 picks so its not correct to say that all we really got was the 37th pick, because that pick facilitated in a major way the other 5 picks.
     
  19. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    I double spent the pick because GB did. Yes we did trade Javon FOR that pick. Then we could have spent it on a player.

    At that time we lost 1 Asset and had a 37th pick and a 139. Then we traded away those 2 assets to a completely different team.

    Thus giving away 3 total assets. How can you say we only gave away Javon and a 139 when 2 other teams got a total of 3 assets from us?

    You can look at it like you want to Zero. But the trades say it all.

    Denver gave us 1 player for Javon.......Period. All the other trades were a result of trading away draft spots which we could have used for players.
     
  20. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    Read what you just said. PLEASE for the love of GOD read what you said.

    You just double talked in hopes of proving your point which failed, miserably lol.


    I hope you let your wife/husband do your bills. (Sorry, but you're unreal)

    Start of weekend = Javon . Pick 139
    End of weekend = five picks

    Even COUNTING Javon an asset to the Packers is non sense. HE wasn't going to play for us! I was stubborn to the fact until it came out he started the Driver wanting out of GB rumor. oh phuck it

    I've had enough. I've proved my point very thoroughly. You wanna neglect seeing the elephant on the couch, that's your business.



    Take care and :beersign: :beersign: :beersign:
     
  21. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yeah your right....If you can't see that Denver got 1 player from us and Atlanta got 2 then phuck it.


    You like to make it sound like I was opposed to the trade which I was not. I just can't see how TT did anything special besides pick up an OG and 3-4 guys that will contribute nothing to this team, hell, half of them will probably not even make the team.

    Should have stayed put with that second and drafted a quality player instead of trading it away and re-trading over and over for Johnny Jolly,Culver and a 3rd string QB.
     
  22. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    fans pretending to know more than GMs amuses me.
     
  23. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yeah I know Tro, TT is a rocket scientist. The same rocket scientist that led us to a 4-12 team last year.
     
  24. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    he led us? he was the coach?

    were the guards bad because of TT? yes. Did TT tell Sherman to pull those crappy guards on running plays and making them useless? no.

    wow...just wow.

    i'm done with you. be gone.
     
  25. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    Ahh, so Ted was a player or was he the coach? Neither! You're right! He's the silly GM that didn't flip a 53-man roster in season. What a wash!

    btw, atlanta got two picks, they gave us three. Which we then turned into... well here
    • Trade : Picks 37 & 139 to ATL for picks 47, 93 & 148.
      Trade : Pick 93 to STL for picks 109 & 183.
      Trade : Pick 109 to PHI for picks 115 & 185


    :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink: :wink:
     

Share This Page