Packers to sign DT Jarran Reed

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
I highly doubt Rodgers will show up in Green Bay for any offseason workouts, most likely not even for the mandatory minicamp.



I agree that speculating should definitely be welcomed on a forum but in my opinion it doesn't make sense to propose unrealistic scenarios repeatedly.



The Steelers GM should be fired before hanging up the phone if he agrees to the trade you suggested.
I highly doubt Rodgers will show up in Green Bay for any offseason workouts, most likely not even for the mandatory minicamp.



I agree that speculating should definitely be welcomed on a forum but in my opinion it doesn't make sense to propose unrealistic scenarios repeatedly.



The Steelers GM should be fired before hanging up the phone if he agrees to the trade you suggested.
Knowing Rodgers, unfortunately you may be right. I will question his commitment to winning a SB though if he doesn't show up this year for all OTAs, as will many others. Now that Gluten is likely to give him 2 or 2 rookie WRs to work with, as well as a veteran WR, he needs to be there.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,414
Reaction score
1,291
I agree he should be there. But a part of me likes the idea of Love getting reps. Maybe Rodgers could come in half way through?
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
I agree he should be there. But a part of me likes the idea of Love getting reps. Maybe Rodgers could come in half way through?
That sounds reasonable. Love has to get his work in with the new guys too. Let Rodgers skip OTAs and attend the minicamp. It's just that after being so upset with Gluten for taking Love instead of a WR(s) three years ago, you'd think he'd show up. But he's Rodgers. Don't want him there if he's in the middle of a cleanse anyway. :eek:

Alternatively he could take a series or two in PS with the new guys. Although even I doubt that will happen given his attitude toward PS. And I don't really disagree with him on that one.

The reality is actual game experience will be the best way for all these guys to start working together, and that's not a big disadvantage because it's true for all teams. Pittsburgh and a few other teams will be starting new QBs. At least we don't have to suffer through that learning curve.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
2,851
Reaction score
1,627
That's not a fair trade @Schultz?
You are getting a current year 3rd rounder for a following year 3rd rounder. Packer advantage. You are giving up a current year #1 for a player you must think is as good as a guy you could draft or why make the trade. Break even or slight edge Pitt because of rookie contract. Then you are asking them to throw in a current year 2nd round pick. That is how a broke down the trade.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
You are getting a current year 3rd rounder for a following year 3rd rounder. Packer advantage. You are giving up a current year #1 for a player you must think is as good as a guy you could draft or why make the trade. Break even or slight edge Pitt because of rookie contract. Then you are asking them to throw in a current year 2nd round pick. That is how a broke down the trade.
Yeah I don't even know how Pittsburgh feels about trading Johnson. They need a QB, and this year there are only two first round candidates, and that's pushing it. Next year's draft is way better. I'd rather GB offered to trade a 1st round pick next year and a 2nd rounder this year. That gives Pittsburgh more draft capital next year to trade up and get a QB they like. It also means they suck it up this year as a rebuild. That's just not Pittsburg's way. But who knows.

And a 1st round pick from GB next year is gonna be, well ideally #32, but late in the round nonetheless.

Knowing Gluten, he has something else up his sleeve.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I must admit I can't recall any transactions of that nature happening.

That doesn't mean that it won't happen.

It should tell you it's pretty unrealistic though.

Knowing Rodgers, unfortunately you may be right. I will question his commitment to winning a SB though if he doesn't show up this year for all OTAs, as will many others. Now that Gluten is likely to give him 2 or 2 rookie WRs to work with, as well as a veteran WR, he needs to be there.

I'm fine with Rodgers not showing up until camp as I don't think him participating in OTAs or minicamp would result in a better chemistry with his receivers during the season.

Alternatively he could take a series or two in PS with the new guys. Although even I doubt that will happen given his attitude toward PS. And I don't really disagree with him on that one.

I think the team not wanting to risk Rodgers getting injured in a meaningless game factors into the decision to not play him during the preseason as well.

Yeah I don't even know how Pittsburgh feels about trading Johnson.

Although I don't know it for a fact I'm pretty confident in saying the Steelers aren't interested in trading Johnson at all.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
It should tell you it's pretty unrealistic though.



I'm fine with Rodgers not showing up until camp as I don't think him participating in OTAs or minicamp would result in a better chemistry with his receivers during the season.



I think the team not wanting to risk Rodgers getting injured in a meaningless game factors into the decision to not play him during the preseason as well.



Although I don't know it for a fact I'm pretty confident in saying the Steelers aren't interested in trading Johnson at all.
I don't agree that having Rodgers spend some camp time would not help acclimate to rookies. Doesn't male sense. It's not nearly the same as real game experience, but better to learn and make mistakes when it doesn't count.

I agree that PS games aren't the ideal time to play him, evener for the sake of acclimating to new receivers and other players. And as he gets older, the risk of an injury goes up and there's no red jersey in PS games.

And I doubt that the Steelers are interested in parting ways with Johnson. What are your thoughts on a trade partner and candidate for veteran WR?
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I don't agree that having Rodgers spend some camp time would not help acclimate to rookies. Doesn't male sense. It's not nearly the same as real game experience, but better to learn and make mistakes when it doesn't count.

And I doubt that the Steelers are interested in parting ways with Johnson. What are your thoughts on a trade partner and candidate for veteran WR?

Just to clarify, I fully expect Rodgers to report for training camp but there's hardly any benefit from him being around for OTAs and minicamp.

I would like to see the Packers sign one of Julio Jones, Keelan Cole, T.Y. Hilton and A.J. Green. Unfortunately I have no idea about receivers possibly being available via trade.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
Just to clarify, I fully expect Rodgers to report for training camp but there's hardly any benefit from him being around for OTAs and minicamp.

I would like to see the Packers sign one of Julio Jones, Keelan Cole, T.Y. Hilton and A.J. Green. Unfortunately I have no idea about receivers possibly being available via trade.
Gotcha, and agree. TC is more important anyway as they're putting in the plan for the season.

The Packers may have to go with one of the WRs you list. I don't know of any trade candidates either, and I'm not that fond of trading for need because the price is usually too high. Everybody knows the Packers need a veteran WR, so the price will be high in a trade.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,119
Reaction score
4,992
Just to clarify, I fully expect Rodgers to report for training camp but there's hardly any benefit from him being around for OTAs and minicamp.

I would like to see the Packers sign one of Julio Jones, Keelan Cole, T.Y. Hilton and A.J. Green. Unfortunately I have no idea about receivers possibly being available via trade.

Would love a signing from there, and if Laviska Shenault is someone the Jags would move from add that big YAC style WR and draft best available WR at some point with our first two picks in draft…
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
Would love a signing from there, and if Laviska Shenault is someone the Jags would move from add that big YAC style WR and draft best available WR at some point with our first two picks in draft…
Shenault would be an ideal acquisition. I just don't think the Jags would be willing to trade him. But who knows? Most mocks have one of the top two OLinemen going to the Jags to better protect Lawrence. That would make Shenault all the more dangerous if Lawrence gets more time to throw. But hey, if the price is right.....

I like Hilton over Julio Jones in FA. Jones is the more dynamic receiver as far as size but has had a lot of injuries. I don't know for sure but I'm thinking Hilton would be more durable.

I do hope the veteran WR position is filled before the draft. That should drive who they pick, and when, in the draft.
 

kevans74

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 16, 2017
Messages
1,122
Reaction score
273
Location
USA
Shenault would be an ideal acquisition. I just don't think the Jags would be willing to trade him. But who knows? Most mocks have one of the top two OLinemen going to the Jags to better protect Lawrence. That would make Shenault all the more dangerous if Lawrence gets more time to throw. But hey, if the price is right.....

I like Hilton over Julio Jones in FA. Jones is the more dynamic receiver as far as size but has had a lot of injuries. I don't know for sure but I'm thinking Hilton would be more durable.

I do hope the veteran WR position is filled before the draft. That should drive who they pick and when in the draft.
It should be the other way around

You pick the young guy first to invest in and then sign a veteran
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
It should be the other way around

You pick the young guy first to invest in and then sign a veteran
The more I think about it the less it seems to matter (taking a vet before or after the draft). I'm just not very patient when it comes to signing a vet WR. A lot of talent has already been claimed in FA.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,119
Reaction score
4,992
Shenault would be an ideal acquisition. I just don't think the Jags would be willing to trade him. But who knows? Most mocks have one of the top two OLinemen going to the Jags to better protect Lawrence. That would make Shenault all the more dangerous if Lawrence gets more time to throw. But hey, if the price is right.....

I like Hilton over Julio Jones in FA. Jones is the more dynamic receiver as far as size but has had a lot of injuries. I don't know for sure but I'm thinking Hilton would be more durable.

I do hope the veteran WR position is filled before the draft. That should drive who they pick, and when, in the draft.

I would be Laviska is moveable - given the massive amount of money and signings at the WR position they’ve done. He already wasn’t panning out in a massive way and clearly now will solely be a support piece
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
I would be Laviska is moveable - given the massive amount of money and signings at the WR position they’ve done. He already wasn’t panning out in a massive way and clearly now will solely be a support piece
You still like him for GB?
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
100% in this system and as we don’t have that role locked down. Especially for the right cost.
That's interesting. And if he's not working out in Jax, well maybe he excels in GB. I don't know enough about him but will certainly take look.

When was he drafted? I seem to recall he was considered a candidate for the Packers and that it wasn't long ago.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
2,851
Reaction score
1,627
He was in the no WR draft of 2020 I believe. After the #1 pick JAX has 33-65-70. If any of those are a WR I could see them trading Shenault. Here is the catch 22 though. They will want to trade him for the right price. Any team trading for him will want to get him for the right price.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,389
Reaction score
5,760
For OL, I would presume the Packers do what they usually do in finding late round gems ...
The only realistic chance of a “late round” gem is that #171 selection.
I definitely don’t expect a late 7th Round OL any significant help in 2022.

We saw last season how quickly things spiral downwards with just a few injuries across OL.
Protecting #12 is numero uno. Nothing else matters if he goes down…
Conversely, If GB were to somehow hit at 1 more Elgton universal OL type? We’d be lethal if Bak, Jenkins and Myers were all healthy.

I’d be considering OL starting at #28 and keying on it by #92. Anything past our #140 is not expecting any meaningful contributions this season
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
He was in the no WR draft of 2020 I believe. After the #1 pick JAX has 33-65-70. If any of those are a WR I could see them trading Shenault. Here is the catch 22 though. They will want to trade him for the right price. Any team trading for him will want to get him for the right price.
Yeah and everyone knows the Packers WR cupboard is pretty bare, so a vet won't come cheap. Still, what choice is there? At least there's decent draft capital available for a trade, but the Packers won't be stealing anyone. And then there's the matter of paying the guy in a tight cap situation.
He was in the no WR draft of 2020 I believe. After the #1 pick JAX has 33-65-70. If any of those are a WR I could see them trading Shenault. Here is the catch 22 though. They will want to trade him for the right price. Any team trading for him will want to get him for the right price.
I'd expect the Jags to want another 1st rounder for Shenault. I have no idea if that's fair value.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,606
Reaction score
1,796
The only realistic chance of a “late round” gem is that #171 selection.
I definitely don’t expect a late 7th Round OL any significant help in 2022.

We saw last season how quickly things spiral downwards with just a few injuries across OL.
Protecting #12 is numero uno. Nothing else matters if he goes down…
Conversely, If GB were to somehow hit at 1 more Elgton universal OL type? We’d be lethal if Bak, Jenkins and Myers were all healthy.

I think the Packers should draft OL using #53 at earliest and #140 (Close of round 4) at the latest.
Yeah and there's been no word on Bakh. That's not strange, why show cards, but it's a little concerning. I don't think the team ever provided a decent explanation of what went wrong with his ACL repair and subsequent arthroscopy for a torn meniscus. It was concerning that he took 20 plus snaps against the Lions, and none against the Niners.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,119
Reaction score
4,992
I usually put the old IMO along with my posts. I feel confident enough to make this statement without it. No one is giving up a #1 for Shenault.

I’d even bet Jags are not thinking they’d get that either.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I don't know of any trade candidates either, and I'm not that fond of trading for need because the price is usually too high. Everybody knows the Packers need a veteran WR, so the price will be high in a trade.

The Packers will need to invest some serious resources to upgrade the wide receiver position before the start of the season anyway. If they're able to work out a decent trade for a WR who will contribute immediately I would definitely be fine with giving up fair compensation for him.

It should be the other way around

You pick the young guy first to invest in and then sign a veteran

You need to realize that the pickings are slimmer after the draft though.

A lot of talent has already been claimed in FA.

While that's true the Packers didn't have enough cap space to match any of the deals wide receivers agreed to up until now.

I would be Laviska is moveable - given the massive amount of money and signings at the WR position they’ve done. He already wasn’t panning out in a massive way and clearly now will solely be a support piece

I'm not convinced the Jaguars are ready to move on from Shenault. He could still end up as the #3 wide receiver on their depth chart.

When was he drafted? I seem to recall he was considered a candidate for the Packers and that it wasn't long ago.

Shenault was drafted in the second round (42nd overall) of the 2020 draft.

We saw last season how quickly things spiral downwards with just a few injuries across OL.
Protecting #12 is numero uno. Nothing else matters if he goes down…

Fortunately Rodgers is able to elevate the performance of the offensive line while protecting himself better than any rookie would be possible of.

I'd expect the Jags to want another 1st rounder for Shenault. I have no idea if that's fair value.

There's no way the Jags receive a first rounder for Shenault in a trade.

Yeah and there's been no word on Bakh. That's not strange, why show cards, but it's a little concerning. I don't think the team ever provided a decent explanation of what went wrong with his ACL repair and subsequent arthroscopy for a torn meniscus. It was concerning that he took 20 plus snaps against the Lions, and none against the Niners.

There's no doubt Bakhtiari suffered multiple setbacks last season. Hopefully another offseason will result in him being fully healthy in September.
 

Members online

Top