Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
2 Pages12>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
wpr  
#1 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:02:30 PM(UTC)
LombardiAve said:
I remember a few years back thinking I would trade all of the Packers draft picks (the actual draft picks) for Adrian Peterson. With the trade deadline looming, and rumors of Adrian Peterson on the trading block, and for entertainment purposes only, we ask if you would you consider trading 23-year-old Green Bay Packers rookie running back Eddie Lacy (83 carries//352 yards/ 4.2 ave, 2 touchdowns) for Minnesota superstar Adrian Peterson 115 carries/511 yards/4.4 ave., 5 touchdowns)?


why?
steveishere  
#2 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:14:40 PM(UTC)
Don't know why there are so many "No" votes. That's ridiculous, AP would absolutely tear it up in this offense. The guy is averaging 3.3 yards per carry this year AFTER CONTACT. He'd make a Superbowl run a heck of a lot easier.
DarkaneRules  
#3 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:17:03 PM(UTC)
The younger the better. I'll pass with hesitation.
User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#4 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:18:45 PM(UTC)
Hell to the no! Peterson has been rode hard and put up wet.
Wade  
#5 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:23:48 PM(UTC)
No. No. And again, no.

The Packers do not need an all-world back to provide "balance".

Peterson is getting up there in RB mileage.

And, IIRC, he has had two serious injuries (one in college, one in pros) already.

I was not a fan of the Lacy pick (as, I expect you will recall, Wayne). But looks like I was wrong.

And even if Lacy turns out to be a one-year wonder, trading for Peterson makes no sense to me.

If the Packers want to make a "blockbuster" trade (which, of course, Ted does not), go for an OL.

FWIW
Zero2Cool  
#6 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:30:40 PM(UTC)
Adrian Peterson is 28 years old.
2013: $11.25 million,
2014: $11.75 million,
2015: $12.75 million,
2016: $14.75 million,
2017: $15.75 million
2018: Free Agent


Eddie Lacy is 22 years old and is locked into a salary friendly contract for four seasons.
Signed a four-year, $3.392 million contract. The deal included an $847,208 signing bonus.


You bring on Adrian Peterson for who? What two or three players to eliminate for a RB nearing 30 years old? Peterson isn't going to win the Packers any games. You don't lock up 8 figures in a player that's not going to win you games.

Packers are getting similar production with a younger RB who's costing MILLIONS less.
nerdmann  
#7 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:35:52 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
Hell to the no! Peterson has been rode hard and put up wet.


Lacy's more consistent.

Peterson is good, but his thing is to break off a long run every now and then, after getting stuffed a number of times. Besides I agree, Lacy's much younger.

I think Lacy and Franklin are special.
nerdmann  
#8 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:37:31 PM(UTC)
Wade said: Go to Quoted Post
No. No. And again, no.

The Packers do not need an all-world back to provide "balance".

Peterson is getting up there in RB mileage.

And, IIRC, he has had two serious injuries (one in college, one in pros) already.

I was not a fan of the Lacy pick (as, I expect you will recall, Wayne). But looks like I was wrong.

And even if Lacy turns out to be a one-year wonder, trading for Peterson makes no sense to me.

If the Packers want to make a "blockbuster" trade (which, of course, Ted does not), go for an OL.

FWIW


Go for a C.
sschind  
#9 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:56:58 PM(UTC)
No. For all the reasons stated.
User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#10 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 3:11:12 PM(UTC)
Wade said: Go to Quoted Post


I was not a fan of the Lacy pick (as, I expect you will recall, Wayne). But looks like I was wrong.



Yeah, you're wrong about a lot of shit, I just like all the effort you put into your essays. [grin1]
go.pack.go.  
#11 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 3:26:10 PM(UTC)
No, I wouldn't do it. Like said before, we don't need a RB like Peterson to have balance. Lacy is great for our offense, especially having Franklin to back him up.
wpr  
#12 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 3:58:46 PM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
Don't know why there are so many "No" votes. That's ridiculous, AP would absolutely tear it up in this offense. The guy is averaging 3.3 yards per carry this year AFTER CONTACT. He'd make a Superbowl run a heck of a lot easier.


I guess all the posts above list the reasons why there are so many nos.
beast  
#13 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 4:45:55 PM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Go for a C.



I keep reading some talk about getting a Center... but is D-Smith really that bad?

Why not just resign D-Smith?

Also Mike McCarthy said Lang can play Center (which I haven't seen or heard of him talking a snap for sure yet, but I'll trust Mike McCarthy on this one) and they're trying to teach Barclay to play Center (and maybe Sherrod or Bulaga can take RT from Barclay).
User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#14 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 4:50:06 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
I keep reading some talk about getting a Center... but is D-Smith really that bad?

Why not just resign D-Smith?

Also Mike McCarthy said Lang can play Center (which I haven't seen or heard of him talking a snap for sure yet, but I'll trust Mike McCarthy on this one) and they're trying to teach Barclay to play Center (and maybe Sherrod or Bulaga can take RT from Barclay).


EDS has gotten better, but I want to see what the Tretter kid has next training camp. Barclay really shouldn't be starting, he's more of a serviceable utility lineman.
DoddPower  
#15 Posted : Sunday, October 27, 2013 10:28:12 PM(UTC)
If both Peterson and Lacy cost the same, then sure, I'd prefer Peterson. Peterson is a better running back than Lacy, at this point, and likely will be for at least a couple more seasons. But the reality is they do not cost the same, which makes my vote an easy "no." Not worth the cap hit and the consequences of such.

It would be fun to watch though!
Gaycandybacon  
#16 Posted : Monday, October 28, 2013 12:28:39 AM(UTC)
I'm not defending the Queens but what would they benefit from trading Peterson? I mean he's special. Every team has their special player, good or bad. He's their franchise player. He's not Trent Richardson, He's Adrian Peterson. The best running back in the league. Honestly the Vikings would be stupid to trade him unless it was for a franchise QB and no one in their right minds will do that.
JustinAVA182  
#17 Posted : Monday, October 28, 2013 12:51:28 AM(UTC)
I know we are only talking about this for poops and giggles. If there was a trade I could choose for fun/not totally impossible but (very unlikely) it would be acquiring Larry Fitzgerald. The Packers have proved they can develop and produce wins with the next man up in multiple positions. Jordy Nelson has been amazing and the run game has made this offense a multi threat. Boykin has filled in great as well.. I just think adding Larry would make this offense crazy scary. He has shown to be a huge weapon with no other threats around him. I think with Rodgers throwing to him he could return to the status of being considered one of the best in the league behind Megatron/Dez. We have shown we don’t need him these last few games and that’s awesome… I’m just thinking playoffs and facing a defense like Seattle. I think we could struggle against the elite secondary there. With Cobb and others set to return by then I hope I’m totally wrong. That fractured fibula injury sucks..will he be the same when he returns? I hope.. Finley is still a question mark as if he’ll play again. I think a trade like this would set us over the top as far as offense goes. It could be magic! Nelson/Cobb/Fitz/Jones… pick your poison. He’s 30 years old with a big contract sadly. With Jones potently walking after this season and Nelson deserving a rise I wish there was way lol.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#18 Posted : Monday, October 28, 2013 4:28:43 AM(UTC)
When I read this, my first thought was it would be like somebody selling their soul to the devil for some quick pleasure. Yeah, getting Peterson might make the Packers a near sure thing for this years Super Bowl - assuming he didn't pull a hamstring or something hahaha, but after that, it's all down hill. Lacy seems to be the real deal and should be at least solid for a long time, maybe a lot better than solid. Put me down as a big hell no.

A more realistic idea would be trading a 3rd or 4th round pick for Jared Allen, but I wouldn't do that either. Allen couldn't even beat Bakhtiari last night with the whole world watching as he auditioned for a trade to some contender.
wpr  
#19 Posted : Monday, October 28, 2013 5:40:54 AM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon said: Go to Quoted Post
I'm not defending the Queens but what would they benefit from trading Peterson? I mean he's special. Every team has their special player, good or bad. He's their franchise player. He's not Trent Richardson, He's Adrian Peterson. The best running back in the league. Honestly the Vikings would be stupid to trade him unless it was for a franchise QB and no one in their right minds will do that.


The only way I see them trading AP is if they get 2 first and 3 second round picks.
sschind  
#20 Posted : Monday, October 28, 2013 7:18:52 AM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon said: Go to Quoted Post
I'm not defending the Queens but what would they benefit from trading Peterson? I mean he's special. Every team has their special player, good or bad. He's their franchise player. He's not Trent Richardson, He's Adrian Peterson. The best running back in the league. Honestly the Vikings would be stupid to trade him unless it was for a franchise QB and no one in their right minds will do that.


I agree. Obviously if they get an offer that is too good to be true they do it but I highly doubt that will happen. No one is going to give up multiple #1 picks and then some for a 28 year old RB with one ACL tear already and if the vikings accepted anything less than that they would be stupid.

JustinAVA182 said: Go to Quoted Post
I know we are only talking about this for poops and giggles. If there was a trade I could choose for fun/not totally impossible but (very unlikely) it would be acquiring Larry Fitzgerald.


OK, I'll play. I'd rather have Josh Gordon than Fitz but he might take more to get simply because he is so much younger. He would take multiple #1 picks as well IMO. AT least if I am Cleveland I am not taking anything less.

Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
Porforis (10h) : Noooo, not Goode!
Zero2Cool (14h) : The #Packers place Brett Goode on IR and re-sign LS Taybor Pepper
Zero2Cool (14h) : Packers signing Ulrick John to active roster off Cardinals practice squad today, according to a source
Porforis (14h) : Agreed. HOW ABOUT THEM PACKERS?!
greengold (14h) : i.e. keep politics out of football!
greengold (14h) : Let the players who want to honor the flag along with the vast majority of fans do so. Don't celebrate those who don't.
greengold (14h) : Rule, practice, suggestion? Whatever supposedly changed in 2009. Go back to the way it was. Let the players who want to honor the flag an
Zero2Cool (14h) : Roethlisberger regrets Steelers' decision to skip anthem
Zero2Cool (14h) : Chmura: "#Packers by 10-14. The Bears already played their good game. I have absolutely no fear for Thursday's game."
Zero2Cool (14h) : The NFL Rulebook does not mention the anthem.
Zero2Cool (14h) : There is no rule.
greengold (14h) : The NFL needs to enforce the rule or get rid of the rule.
greengold (14h) : Players stood for the National Anthem long before 2009. There just was no *rule* requiring them to stand.
steveishere (15h) : How many fans are in the restroom taking a dump or in line for nachos during anthem. Same people probably mad at players
Porforis (16h) : Yup.
Zero2Cool (16h) : You know why
Porforis (16h) : NFL players weren't even on the field for the anthem until 2009 - Why all of a sudden is not participating such a big deal?
Zero2Cool (17h) : Former Seahawks/Packers HC Mike Holmgren on President Trump: “He’s uninformed”.
steveishere (18h) : Funny how you were apparently fine with seeing guys who abuse women or do/sell drugs out there but god forbid they kneel lol
steveishere (18h) : you had 1 foot out the door since Favre left anyways... bye
dhazer (18h) : well so much for watching Packer games, I saw the 3 sitting on the bench and i turned the channel to the race, No more NFL games for me
beast (25-Sep) : Who are the longshots? Jags? Saints? Redskins? and who?
SINCITYCHEEZE (25-Sep) : Buckeye closing in on 4 Longshots in Pickem today....Son you need to hook me up we could make a killing on some parlays next weekend. Lol
beast (25-Sep) : Bears ran it 60% of the time...
beast (24-Sep) : Bears tried hard to give it away, but Steelers couldn't take it
Mucky Tundra (24-Sep) : Lot of injuries :(
Zero2Cool (24-Sep) : OUT for the Packers: WR Randall Cobb S Kentrell Brice CB Davon House LB Jake Ryan LB Nick Perry T David Bakhtiari DT Mike Daniels
beast (24-Sep) : Ravens/Jags must be a FF nightmare, as ol' TEs who never score, had 4 of the 6 TDs
beast (24-Sep) : Bears beating Steelers at halftime.
beast (24-Sep) : https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/yp89dj/stephen-a-smith-points-out-nfls-paid-patriotism-problem
beast (24-Sep) : I just read that it wasn't until the NFL started getting paid by the DoD (in 2009), that players were on the sidelines for the Anthem. (I ca
Zero2Cool (24-Sep) : apparently it was comon to stay in lockeroom years ago
Zero2Cool (24-Sep) : i couldn't find anything confirming its against the rules
beast (24-Sep) : Is it against the rules to be in the lockerroom for the Anthem?
yooperfan (24-Sep) : Prolly some fines coming down.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

5h / Around The NFL / Smokey

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Porforis

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

8h / Around The NFL / Barfarn

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

Headlines