Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Trade Watson?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Magooch" data-source="post: 1094750" data-attributes="member: 17987"><p>At least with regards to a trade, my gut says that Watson is more valuable to us than he would be to prospective "buyers". I don't think anyone is offering anything CLOSE to a first for Watson. Similarly we are not getting anything near a 1 for Reed either. IMO your absolute best case scenario is probably a 2nd for Watson (and even that's probably wishful thinking; probably a late 2 at best) and Reed you're probably looking at like a 4th. Maybe something like a 3rd if you send a pick in return. At those rates, it's a lot more sensible for us to try and hang on to them. Whenever I see these trade propositions I always have to ask myself what I'd do if the shoe was on the other foot - how much would I be comfortable with GB giving up in trade for a Watson or Reed-level player?</p><p></p><p>Anywho, that's of course contingent on the price for us, too. In a vacuum, it's easy to say "Watson is worth more to us than what we'd get in a trade," but if Watson is asking for 40m a year (hyperbole), well, then maybe you can decide that a late 2nd is worth more to us than Watson at 40m a year. There's always a balance there. Of course this is an extreme example but you get the point.</p><p></p><p>All that being said though unless Watson's demands are just outrageous it's hard for me to see the value in moving Watson right now. I haven't dug into the actual stats to see the difference in concrete terms (I think they are out there and have seen some allusions to them) but I can tell you that at least by the eye test our offense LOOKS so, so, so much better when he plays. Maybe he is not the only factor but I feel like - again, just speaking visually here - our offense looks night-and-day better when he is on the field than when he is off it. (I'd have to track it down but I remember reading that Love's passer rating was dramatically better when Watson is on the field - not even targeted, just when he's present)</p><p></p><p>Reed on the other hand I'm a little more ambivalent about. I like him but I think he's a considerably more replaceable player for us.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Magooch, post: 1094750, member: 17987"] At least with regards to a trade, my gut says that Watson is more valuable to us than he would be to prospective "buyers". I don't think anyone is offering anything CLOSE to a first for Watson. Similarly we are not getting anything near a 1 for Reed either. IMO your absolute best case scenario is probably a 2nd for Watson (and even that's probably wishful thinking; probably a late 2 at best) and Reed you're probably looking at like a 4th. Maybe something like a 3rd if you send a pick in return. At those rates, it's a lot more sensible for us to try and hang on to them. Whenever I see these trade propositions I always have to ask myself what I'd do if the shoe was on the other foot - how much would I be comfortable with GB giving up in trade for a Watson or Reed-level player? Anywho, that's of course contingent on the price for us, too. In a vacuum, it's easy to say "Watson is worth more to us than what we'd get in a trade," but if Watson is asking for 40m a year (hyperbole), well, then maybe you can decide that a late 2nd is worth more to us than Watson at 40m a year. There's always a balance there. Of course this is an extreme example but you get the point. All that being said though unless Watson's demands are just outrageous it's hard for me to see the value in moving Watson right now. I haven't dug into the actual stats to see the difference in concrete terms (I think they are out there and have seen some allusions to them) but I can tell you that at least by the eye test our offense LOOKS so, so, so much better when he plays. Maybe he is not the only factor but I feel like - again, just speaking visually here - our offense looks night-and-day better when he is on the field than when he is off it. (I'd have to track it down but I remember reading that Love's passer rating was dramatically better when Watson is on the field - not even targeted, just when he's present) Reed on the other hand I'm a little more ambivalent about. I like him but I think he's a considerably more replaceable player for us. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
R
Valuation of NFL Teams
Latest: rmontro
26 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: Heyjoe4
Today at 10:59 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Wisky newbie
Latest: Poppa San
Today at 9:25 AM
Introduce Yourself
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 9:19 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 9:16 AM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Trade Watson?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
