Packers trade scenario

[CaptainKickass]

With all the talk regrading trading for WR's etc I wanted to get some feedback from the rest of you regarding what I see as a unique position for the Pack to be in.

Just look at the position we are in with a mutitude of young players at several positions other than OL and WR. If I recall, the Pack has some 90+ players right now. The highest in the leauge I believe. We are in a tremendous position to trade player(s) for depth to other teams for positions of need before the mandatory roster reductions begin, rather than just simply releasing those who don't make it past the reduction.

I don't see TT giving up draft picks, but I could certainly see him trading multiple players to bolster depth at perhaps several positions to a team for a player of specific need - ie: OL/WR. Wether or not TT can make that happen remains to be seen but it is a very interesting scenario to say the least.

Considering the quantity of players - which positions on the GB roster are the deepest?

What teams have a player that we could use, but a lack of depth where we have abundance?

[Bretsky]

We ran over this idea a while back; I really don't think we are loaded with depth of quality players at any position on our roster. We have a bunch of role players on the DL we could sacrifice. Our OL depth is slim. WR's slim. RB's slim. LB's behind the top 4 slim. Safetie depth slim. Depth behind top 3 CB's slim. I see nothing.

I'm not saying we are going to be that bad; but we have little that would interest another team w/o hurting ourselves.

MAYBE a team would take a flyer on a DL that wouldn't hurt us, but in reality teams won't give up much for the likes of Kenny Pederson or Corey Williams.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re: Packers trade scenario

Considering the quantity of players - which positions on the GB roster are the deepest?

We really don't have that many guys with a lot of trade value or enough depth to fill the spot if we trade the guy. Our best tradeable players are Donald Driver (nobody to replace him), Chad Clifton and Mark Tauscher (nobody to replace them), Aaron Kampman (nobody to replace him), Nick Barnett and A.J. Hawk (wouldn't want to trade them), Charles Woodson and Al Harris (nobody to replace them), Nick Collins (wouldn't want to trade him). Bubba Franks might be tradeable, but I don't think he has a ton of a value, and we can't rely on David Martin. If you are looking for a smaller deal we have depth at DT. We could deal one of our DTs for a young prospect on the OL.

What teams have a player that we could use, but a lack of depth where we have abundance?

Denver has some depth on the OL (Chris Kuper, Greg Eslinger, Dwayne Carswell, etc.) and they could use a DT. Maybe a Corey Williams for a Kuper or Eslinger.

[Bretsky]

I STILL can't believe we didn't draft Greg Eslinger

[woodbuck27]

We ran over this idea a while back; I really don't think we are loaded with depth of quality players at any position on our roster. We have a bunch of role players on the DL we could sacrifice. Our OL depth is slim. WR's slim. RB's slim. LB's behind the top 4 slim. Safetie depth slim. Depth behind top 3 CB's slim. I see nothing.

I'm not saying we are going to be that bad; but we have little that would interest another team w/o hurting ourselves.

MAYBE a team would take a flyer on a DL that wouldn't hurt us, but in reality teams won't give up much for the likes of Kenny Pederson or Corey Williams.

We need more meat and potato's Bretsky.

Did you see my post in Romper room ole chap ? Took a little shot of satire your way. Hope you enjoy it.

[CaliforniaCheez]

Teams are not going to give up talent at this point.

I just don't see them finding better than Boerigter, Gardner, and Ferguson.

With Jennings and Driver there and Favre throwing I think the passing game will be okay.

The problem as Brett identified is that there is a lack of experience on this young talented team. The only way to gain is experience is by playing.

The Packers will be getting better as the season progresses.

[CaptainKickass]

Obviously - we aren't gonna trade the namesake guys. And I am not insinuating that we do anything of that nature.

What I am saying is that some (almost half) of these guys will be cut. Nobody's gonna be looking for any of those guys to be a starter, but who's thin where we are heavy? C'mon - 90 players now, minus 53 = 37.

There's gonna be 37 players with us now who won't be with us at the start of the season. They are all young.

Who do you think they are and what team might need some of them?
Think about who might be able to use 2, 3 or 4 guys?

[run pMc]

I agree w/ Bretsky...we really don't have very good depth.
Years of making the playoffs have led to other teams raiding our depth chart. Whether you choose to blame Sherman for not restocking is up to you.

Smart coaching and adequate depth (at least some talent in the bottom third of the roster) go a long way towards making the playoffs (IMHO).

Every team has lots of would-be players in camp right now. Barring injuries, I don't think you'll see many trades for marginal players -- most teams will wait for the roster cuts between preseason games.

[Homer Jay]

We may have 37 extra players right now, but, most of them are nothing more than camp bodies. I can't see any team trading for someone who will be cut fairly soon anyway. I don't think the Packers are deep enough at any position to trade quantity for quality.

[woodbuck27]

Yes we have 37 players over the 53-man roster but all teams have that group of players that will be cut and they sorta form a pool that we wil study and throughout the NFL teams it's fist come maybe first served.

Essentially because of that, and (the lack of TRUE depth) we'll have, after T2 selects his Roster. Those extra players slated to be cut, are presently virtually useless in a trade scenario.

[ND72]

I'm going to tell you one guy I think we will trade, not for anything spectacular, but I think he won't make the team, and Thompson is smart enough to know to trade him rather than release him.

Samkon Gado...

I know i'll take some heat, but both practices i've seen, he's easily the 3rd best running back, not counting Ahman Green. If I had a depth Chart, i'd have Green, Davenport, Herron, Gado right now. But that's me.

[MJZiggy]

I can't see him getting rid of Sam. 1. Coach is kinda high on him and says he's improving every day, 2. He's kind of a fan fave and TT would take a lot of heat for trading him especially if he turns into something great, and 3. With the commitment to the run that the coaches are talking about, they may keep an extra back in there. It will be very interesting to see how the 53-man is structured.

[ND72]

so we'll keep a guy cause the fans like him...glad we're trying to win.

[Badgepack]

I'd be more inclined to say we keep him because of all the running backs coming off of injuries, the fact he did a hell of a job last year, Gado's young enough, and doesn't cost much.

[MJZiggy]

That was one reason of 3. You missed the part about his steady improvement and coach really liking what he sees, not to mention the probable extra spot on the squad. We will field the best men and he will be one of them.