Summary of Packer Trades

[sharpe1027]

Theoretically, they traded down and selected one of the same players that they would have taken anyway. That allowed them to trade back up later to get a player that they otherwise not have gotten. Unless all their same tier players were selected between their original pick and their actual pick it is a net gain.

People that say they missed out on players are probably wrong because the packers probably didn't rate these supposedly missed players higher. Thus they are just as likely to have drafted the exact same player several spots earlier.

[sharpe1027]

double post

[Gunakor]

#1 Transaction: Friday April 26, 2013

San Fran 49ers move up in second round

49ers receive: 2013 second-round pick ...No. 55: TE Vance McDonald

Packers receive:

2013 second-round pick ...No. 61: RB Eddie Lacy

2013 sixth-round pick...No. 173: (Traded to the Broncos)

Trade up Fr. #61 >>> #55 San Fran owes Packers 58 Pts. Trade Value

Note #173 = 22.2 Pts

San Fran 49ers took Ted Thompson down for 35.8 Pts in this transaction. That's worth a value equivalent to a mid 5th Rd. pick. They won't get away with that 'trick' again.... or will they?

See Transaction #2 with San Fran 49ers where Packers GM Ted Thompson gets taken again, by The San Fran 49ers.

Analysis: The 49ers moved up six picks in the second round by shipping two 2013 selections to the Packers.

Rice's Vance McDonald is considered one of the top tight ends available in the draft.

Eddie Lacey is considered THE top RB in the draft. And a top tier RB is much more valuable than a top tier TE. Sure, you could make the case that we could have just drafted Lacy at #55, but what would that accomplish? GB doesn't have the pick used to trade up for Franklin, and SF doesn't have McDonald. Would this scenario be any better for Green Bay once they buckle their chinstraps and play the game?

This is another example of another team winning on pick value, yet Green Bay gets the more ACTUAL value. Winner: Ted Thompson, as usual.

[Patler]

Can't believe people sweat PICK values this much. PICKS don't win football games, PLAYERS do.

Take Woody's first example for instance. Yes, we lost out on trade value re: the picks themselves, but we got Jonathan Franklin. Jonathan Franklin is probably comes with the most value of all the players selected with the picks traded in that deal for either team. In fact, it's probably not even gonna be close. While we lost a bit in terms of value of the pick, we won big time in terms of value of the player. Which do you think is more important come September?

That's exactly the point. TT traded up not to get the #125 pick, but to get a player that he apparently valued much higher than the #125 slot. The earlier trades accumulating picks allowed him to do that.

That's why I think the intermediate transactions are irrelevant, its the accumulated effect that matters. In effect, he traded #55 & #88 for #61, #109, #125, #216 and #224.

The only opportunities he lost were to draft the players selected from #55 to #60, who would have been available had he stayed at #55 but were gone when he picked at #61, and the players selected from #88 through #108, who would have been available had he stayed at #88, but were gone when he picked at #109. For that, he received #125, #216 and #224. Let's break that into the details:

In the first instance, rather than drafting Eddie Lacy, he could have drafted:
- Vance McDonald
- Arthur Brown
- D.J Swearinger
- Montee Ball
- Aaron Dobson
- Robert Alford
Who from that group would have been a better pick for the Packers? I'm not suggesting that no one was, because I don't know. But that is all that matters, because anyone else could have been drafted when Lacy was. The trades took away the opportunity of drafting those 6, and nothing more, at that point.

In the second instance, the opportunity lost was to draft any of the following:
- Corey Lemonier
- Brennan Williams
- Keyvon Webster
- Duron Harmon
- Stedman Bailey
- Will Davis
- Brandon Williams
- Sam Montgomery
- Knile Davis
- Zaviar Gooden
- Matt Barkley
- Nico Johnson
- Akeem Spence
- Ace Sanders
- Josh Boyce
- Alex Okafor
- Jelani Jenkins
- Duke Williams
- Dion Sims
- Brian Schwenke
- Edmund Kugbilla
Instead, the Packers got David Bakhtiari, who I have little feeling for one way or another.

In return for all of that, the Packers were able to assure themselves of getting Franklin at #125, and then everyone who followed. We can't say for sure that it allowed them to get Franklin, because maybe he would have continued to fall and would have been available anyway; but the trades assured them of getting him.

So, was the surety of getting Franklin, and the benefit of a couple added picks that turned into Johnson and Dorsey worth the missed opportunities on the above 27 players? That is what it comes down to.

I will leave it up to those of you who study the draft a lot more than I do to debate that,

[smuggler]

Excellent post, Patler.

[pbmax]

Why do I get the feeling that every Rat worried about trade values being a match or a win has never bought anything below retail price?

Its all about leverage and motivation, there is no single list that can accommodate the relative value for each team in each transaction.

I bet, but do not know, that the Packers really wanted to go down near the 49ers pick and did not find many takers. The Seahawks had an offer from a team that really wanted to trade up and did not have better options.

[3irty1]

Why do I get the feeling that every Rat worried about trade values being a match or a win has never bought anything below retail price?

Its all about leverage and motivation, there is no single list that can accommodate the relative value for each team in each transaction.

I bet, but do not know, that the Packers really wanted to go down near the 49ers pick and did not find many takers. The Seahawks had an offer from a team that really wanted to trade up and did not have better options.

This. Any discrepancy in value between trades could easily be explained by the negotiating leverage of being called vs being the one to call. I'd expect GM's receiving offers on the phone to be in a more powerful position whether trading up or down.

[rbaloha1]

The draft chart is only a guide not the holy grail.

On the other hand, the 2 point chart is an ancient proven chart that is continually used without thought.

[wist43]

When was the last time a 5th round draft pick didn't make the team in the same year he was drafted? Jamon Meredith? I think you got your blood up, said something stupid that you really didn't mean a day or two ago and now feel like you have to stick to it even now. If that's not the case then nevermind but just so you know it doesn't have to be like that. Everyone knows and loves your internet persona, especially me, and nobody is going to go all ad hominem on you if you walk this statement back from beyond the seven circles of Skip Bayless. I think you're a damn fine poster and a funny guy and I'd like to think we have enough of a relationship that I could do the same with you for the sake of rational argument.

Yeah, my bloods up... but I'm not happy about the draft. I wouldn't stick with an argument if I didn't think it had merit. I'm very, very frustrated with TT. I hate their philosophy for offensive linemen and how our running game is designed. I was hoping that MM would admit defeat and incorporate some power into the playbook and pick some tougher players.

I'm sick and tired of "versatile" lineman and musical chairs on the OL. There's been less of that b/c Sitton and Lang have stayed healthy; but the Packers prefer a certain type of OL, and that hasn't changed. The muslim guy was the smallest OT available in the draft - just more of the same. 8 years of this shit!!!

And on defense... I'm thinking TT and MM couldn't bring themselves to watch the debacle in SF. I've warmed up to Jones, have my doubts about whether he can hold up as a full time player, but I do like Jones. That said, we still don't have 2-gap NT outside of Pickett. I guess when you only play 2 defensive linemen at a time, you don't need a fat guy to stop the run??

No, my frustration has boiled over with TT... this is just more of the same. I really do see our SB win as a fart in the wind; Howard Green, Jarret Bush, and Frank Zombo all made big plays in the SB - none of those guys is really a player though, except Green, he was just old - and everyone else played at an insane level, from which they've since returned to earth. It was just one of those cosmic things... everythng aligned, and we brought a Lombardi Trophy home.

Had we not gone on that run, and had Rodgers not turned out?? We'd be screaming for TT's head, b/c the rest of the team is pretty shaky without Rodgers covering for them.

[woodbuck27]

Can't believe people sweat PICK values this much. PICKS don't win football games, PLAYERS do.

Take Woody's first example for instance. Yes, we lost out on trade value re: the picks themselves, but we got Jonathan Franklin. Jonathan Franklin is probably comes with the most value of all the players selected with the picks traded in that deal for either team. In fact, it's probably not even gonna be close. While we lost a bit in terms of value of the pick, we won big time in terms of value of the player. Which do you think is more important come September?

I agree on that basis:

Jonathan Franklin was a sweet pick for TT and by far in terms of 'just the draft performance'. That was Ted Thompson's crowning move in this draft.

He traded up to snatch this solid prospect at RB. To do that he had extra pics to do so. We 'only' had Pick #122 in the 4th Rd. at the beginning of the draft.

The value and Johnathan Franklin was more than, just solid. Looking at it all in hindsight that move ROCKED.

It added a little insurance too (Eddie Lacy). A smart move.

GO PACK GO !

[3irty1]

Yeah, my bloods up... but I'm not happy about the draft. I wouldn't stick with an argument if I didn't think it had merit. I'm very, very frustrated with TT. I hate their philosophy for offensive linemen and how our running game is designed. I was hoping that MM would admit defeat and incorporate some power into the playbook and pick some tougher players.

I'm sick and tired of "versatile" lineman and musical chairs on the OL. There's been less of that b/c Sitton and Lang have stayed healthy; but the Packers prefer a certain type of OL, and that hasn't changed. The muslim guy was the smallest OT available in the draft - just more of the same. 8 years of this shit!!!

And on defense... I'm thinking TT and MM couldn't bring themselves to watch the debacle in SF. I've warmed up to Jones, have my doubts about whether he can hold up as a full time player, but I do like Jones. That said, we still don't have 2-gap NT outside of Pickett. I guess when you only play 2 defensive linemen at a time, you don't need a fat guy to stop the run??

No, my frustration has boiled over with TT... this is just more of the same. I really do see our SB win as a fart in the wind; Howard Green, Jarret Bush, and Frank Zombo all made big plays in the SB - none of those guys is really a player though, except Green, he was just old - and everyone else played at an insane level, from which they've since returned to earth. It was just one of those cosmic things... everythng aligned, and we brought a Lombardi Trophy home.

Had we not gone on that run, and had Rodgers not turned out?? We'd be screaming for TT's head, b/c the rest of the team is pretty shaky without Rodgers covering for them.

Building what we've got on the OL has been a miserably slow process with not nearly as much shit sticking to the wall as we'd like. Injuries multiply the bullshit as well. For the most part Musical chairs has slowed down and now just seems like an injury thing. What's going to get my blood up is when we finally do find 5 guys and then start to lose them to the cap. Unless the football gods are truly pricks and we lose 4 or 5 starters this year... we can at least take solace that the units in better shape than it was at this time in 2012.

On the DL It helps that I imagine exactly what it would look like if the group we had performed well this year. Raji is Raji. Pickett has just always been a stud for us. Neal will probably get an expanded role and go nuts this year because its a contract year and he's a fucker. Jones is talented, Wilson does well against the run, I think Boyd will be like Wilson, Daniels is a solid guy from the inside on 3rd down, and then on top of it all we've got a chance to get some more John Jolly. Could be worse.

Most disappointing thing for me after this draft is that we're sunk again if we lose a starting OLB. All the best defenses are 2 or 3 deep there and that position seems to correlate with postseason success.

[woodbuck27]

Eddie Lacey is considered THE top RB in the draft. And a top tier RB is much more valuable than a top tier TE. Sure, you could make the case that we could have just drafted Lacy at #55, but what would that accomplish? GB doesn't have the pick used to trade up for Franklin, and SF doesn't have McDonald. Would this scenario be any better for Green Bay once they buckle their chinstraps and play the game?

This is another example of another team winning on pick value, yet Green Bay gets the more ACTUAL value. Winner: Ted Thompson, as usual.

I have zero problem with TT trading down here as I'm assuming that he felt he could still get Eddie Lacy at Pick #61. Maybe he wanted some added insurance of that (along with an extra pick) or maybe? had an agreement in with the 49ers to 'be hands off' in term of Eddie lacy. Thus the defficiency of the return? I don't really know. Such cannot be analyzed 'in reality'.

My beef (is somewhat) a trade at all with the 49ers; but moreso, that they screwed TT on that trade and again in Rd. 3. I mean ... that shit pushed my buttons.

PACKERS !

[woodbuck27]

That's exactly the point. TT traded up not to get the #125 pick, but to get a player that he apparently valued much higher than the #125 slot. The earlier trades accumulating picks allowed him to do that.

That's why I think the intermediate transactions are irrelevant, its the accumulated effect that matters. In effect, he traded #55 & #88 for #61, #109, #125, #216 and #224.

The only opportunities he lost were to draft the players selected from #55 to #60, who would have been available had he stayed at #55 but were gone when he picked at #61, and the players selected from #88 through #108, who would have been available had he stayed at #88, but were gone when he picked at #109. For that, he received #125, #216 and #224. Let's break that into the details:

In the first instance, rather than drafting Eddie Lacy, he could have drafted:
- Vance McDonald
- Arthur Brown
- D.J Swearinger
- Montee Ball
- Aaron Dobson
- Robert Alford
Who from that group would have been a better pick for the Packers? I'm not suggesting that no one was, because I don't know. But that is all that matters, because anyone else could have been drafted when Lacy was. The trades took away the opportunity of drafting those 6, and nothing more, at that point.

In the second instance, the opportunity lost was to draft any of the following:
- Corey Lemonier
- Brennan Williams
- Keyvon Webster
- Duron Harmon
- Stedman Bailey
- Will Davis
- Brandon Williams
- Sam Montgomery
- Knile Davis
- Zaviar Gooden
- Matt Barkley
- Nico Johnson
- Akeem Spence
- Ace Sanders
- Josh Boyce
- Alex Okafor
- Jelani Jenkins
- Duke Williams
- Dion Sims
- Brian Schwenke
- Edmund Kugbilla
Instead, the Packers got David Bakhtiari, who I have little feeling for one way or another.

In return for all of that, the Packers were able to assure themselves of getting Franklin at #125, and then everyone who followed. We can't say for sure that it allowed them to get Franklin, because maybe he would have continued to fall and would have been available anyway; but the trades assured them of getting him.

So, was the surety of getting Franklin, and the benefit of a couple added picks that turned into Johnson and Dorsey worth the missed opportunities on the above 27 players? That is what it comes down to.

I will leave it up to those of you who study the draft a lot more than I do to debate that,

Patler as it went he might have drafted Johnathan Franklin Rd. 4 Pick #122.

I think 'the real wild card' to watch... is the player he actually chose at Rd. 4 Pick #122 or OT J. C Tretter.

TT had many options at Rd. 4 Pick #122.... 'just at OT', instead of J.C. Tretter.

At the beginning of his Sat. draft (Rd.4) Ted Thompson had already gained Rd. 4 Pick #109; Rd. 5 Pick # 146 and Rd. 7 Pick #224 Fr. the Dolphins Fr. Friday nights Rd. 3 Pick transaction....Rd. 3 Pick #93.

Ted Thompson had to recover from the San Fran 49ers beating... he took in his first two transactions with them.

We had a scrub 6 Rd. Pick # 173 Fr. the cheating San Fran 49ers. Ted's over generosoty allowing them to trade up from #61 >>>#55 in Rd. 2.

We had another 'sexy' ...7th Rd. Pick #216 From 'the High and Mighty' San Fran 49ers flipping our #88 for their #93 Pick.

You know what I concluded from it all so far:

Now TT never has to worry about finding a trade partner in future drafts. San Francisco loves picking the Green Bay Packers pocket.

[Patler]

Sure he could have taken Franklin at #122, but apparently he valued Trotter more. His trades allowed him to take both.

[smuggler]

Whether we take Lacy at 55 or 61 does not matter. If we were going to get Lacy anyway, why not pick up whatever we could get as well?

The 2nd trade is less defensible. I agree.