I liked Douglas, but don't see how having him would improve the outlook at safety. Having the higher draft pick might be a better asset to use for improving the safety position.Originally Posted by Frozen Tundra
I liked Douglas, but don't see how having him would improve the outlook at safety. Having the higher draft pick might be a better asset to use for improving the safety position.
Trading Rasul didn't hurt the Packers at all. Valentine and Ballentine played statistically better than Rasul had been playing. Rasul played much better for the Bills than he had been playing for the Packers. Gute cleared some cap space and got a 3rd round pick while giving up a 5th. Valentine and Ballentine gained some valuable experience. The Packers secondary is in better shape going into 2024 because of that trade.
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
Agreed Mr. Cartero, have to cut some big branches sometimes so the tree grows stronger over time.
Now they just need to scour the draft for a corner or safety whose last name rhymes with “Valentine” and “Ballentine.”
I know how to build a roster.
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
And if you read my last handful of posts I feel pretty smart anyway. Fat mike coached his way out of the playoffs.
Losing Rasul may have cost us an Owl birth...we shall never know for sure.
I would like to have Rasul playing safety or CB for us next year instead of moving up those 68 spots.
And to sharpe I would say....our D was playing like hot garbage, so saying that their was no drop off was hyperbole. I admit, it didn't go to hot steaming garbage when we traded Douglas.
Patler, I maintain what I have said all along. What we gained is not good value for Rasul. He was a baller and had a positive impact on team mates. When we traded down and "lost out" on Branch, look at what we got with those picks. Moving up blows up as often as it works, and in this case we gave up a legit proven NFL DB.
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
What was printed at the time of the trade was that Rasul was the #10 CB in all of football according to PFF. I find it impossible that those 2 played better.
I'd like to see your source on that.
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
My source is stats provided by Pro Football Reference. Now PFR and PFF may differ on which defender is primarily responsible for giving up a reception on a certain play. Believe who you want I guess. But I just had the sense last year that Rasul wasn't playing that great. I wasn't really relying on either PFF or PFR.
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
Rasul considerably outplayed the *allentines, but they held up pretty well nevertheless.
I don't think Rasul cost GB a trip to the Owl, I think a much stronger case could be made that the safeties cost them. I can think of two Kittle plays and a McCaffrey play that were on the safeties. (2 of those 3 were TDs)
Hell, Anders Carlson played a bigger role than Rasul did.
Would you rather have Rasul or Stokes? I'd say Rasul, but Rasul's pushing 30 and he wasn't fast to start with. You can't play him in the slot, and if he was any good at safety they'd have played him there given what they had. I don't know they got 'good value' for him, but offloading an aging player's contract in a 'growth' year isn't a bad idea. I think it's a case of getting rid of a player a year early vs. a year late, and after all the yuck from the year prior and where their record was, I don't blame Gute for pulling the trigger.
Rasul had to go. Otherwise how could the Pack have been the youngest team to win a playoff game.
I've asked myself that question several times. The safeties and others had their issues, but I do recall several summaries of failures in "critical plays" that placed responsibility squarely on Vallentine. I would have preferred having Douglas over not having him, but such is the way of pro sports.
The Packers were adamant that Douglas was not going to play safety. I never understood why not, but deferred to their judgement. I wonder if that would have changed under the new D-staff, or does he "gamble" too much for safety?
As for CB, I still believe he would have been cut for cap purposes this off season anyway, so for me next year is no issue.
I never had a problem with your opinion, so long as it was based on the actual magnitude of movement up the draft board. Where I differed with you was your initial and frequent assertion that it would be "about 40" spots max, and your later conclusion that I was half-wrong for saying it would be about 70, because some article told you it would be about 47 (which you upped to "maybe more like 55" because of comp picks.)
Your initial opinion was based on a movement of about 40 draft spots, then maintained when it was maybe 55 draft spots. Do you continue with that opinion because the actual movement of 68 draft spots is inadequate, or simply because you are unwilling to change your mind?
FYI, I am less positive about the trade now than I was when it happened. I did not expect the playoff run, and thought this year was a throw away. I would have liked to have Douglas on the field in SF. But now that the season is over, I am anxious to see how the 3rd round pick is used.
Agree, and I suspect Gute likely feels the same way too.I am less positive about the trade now than I was when it happened. I did not expect the playoff run, and thought this year was a throw away. I would have liked to have Douglas on the field in SF. But now that the season is over, I am anxious to see how the 3rd round pick is used.
Patler, I do still maintain my opinion and admit 2 things I had way wrong. I didn't expect us to move so far up in each round (by winning a year early) and I had forgotten how many comp picks there are. I like to debate. You always bring good content without making it personal and I love that. I don't mind being wrong eventually (thank god, cuz its bound to happen). I was wrong on the overall compensation. I would still love Rasul as a safety or CB. I think the fact that he got Jaire to stop being a punk and studying film is worth so much.
This was always an exercise in what if, because we can't know several things. Would Douglas have been the difference. How will the draft capital turn out. Would he have been cut after the season. On and on it goes. Similar to cutting Jones. He is such a great team mate and player. Age catches up with all of us. Now excuse me, I need to go drink my ensure for breakfast.
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
Fuckin' Patler. Hate that guy. Uses facts all the time. And if that ain't bad enough, he fucking uses logical reasoning, too.
I'd ban him. Next thing you know, we'll be having discussions based on actual information and open-mindedness.
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
He's probably a media puke who believes in facts, truths, and the salary cap.
Don't worry. There won't be discussions unless Patler gets ab alt account and plays both sides.
Patler would never do anything like that!!
Actually I am Patler. Bobblehead serves as an account to make him look smarter.
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
Shamrockfan disagrees with you.
HOFer
plus the asshole raises the whole average IQ of the board by like 50 points just by posting here
ignorance is bliss baby!!!!!!!
Well you lower it by 100 so we need some balance))))
LIFE IS ABOUT CHAMPIONSHIPS; I JUST REALIZED THIS. The MILWAUKEE BUCKS have won the same number of championships over the past 50 years as the Green Bay Packers. Ten years from now, who will have more championships, and who will be the fart in the wind ?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
