Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
2 Pages12>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline minnypacker  
#1 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 12:28:56 PM(UTC)
minnypacker

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

Posts: 151
Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)


Who are our tradeable assts as cuts etc. take place in the next 24 hrs?

Bishop or Hodge?
Tracy White?
Colledge?
Morency?
Brohm?
KGB?
blank
Sponsor
Offline TheEngineer  
#2 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 12:40:42 PM(UTC)
TheEngineer

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,621
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)


No way Brohm gets traded. It's ridiculous to think TT, of all GMs would be willing to give up on a 2nd rounder after 1 preseason.

I honestly don't know if any of our players may be worth trading for. Maybe one of the LBs, I don't know.
blank
Offline gotarace  
#3 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 12:46:10 PM(UTC)
gotarace

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 359
Joined: 8/3/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 49
Applause Received: 15

I hope any trade includes bush as a free token. We are talent deep on defense. Maybe we can swap a lb for a good o lineman.
Smart As a Horse
Hung Like Einstein
Offline Pack93z  
#4 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 12:56:31 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Posts: 12,755
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 381
Applause Received: 1,027

Ruvell Martin tops the list in my book.. for most teams he would be a solid #3 or #4.. James Jones would draw a ton of interest as well.. but I don't think we would part with a player coming into his second year with the potential that he has. It would take a heck of a deal for us to move him IMO.

Bishop probably has more value than Hodge based on the injury factor... but IMO he is too good to let go without a lot of value coming back to the Packers.

If I am the Packers staff.. I seriously look at Bishop, Hawk and Barnett in some configuration as the starters of this team. Bishop is a thumper that could really sew up the middle of our defense at the Point of Attack.. Barnett and Hawk could play the wings.. the issue there is Barnett's affection to the middle backer spot.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline Packers_Finland  
#5 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 1:05:06 PM(UTC)
Packers_Finland

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Posts: 2,623
Joined: 8/11/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 88
Applause Received: 45

Please, don't get rid of Hodge. He's my favorite defensive non-starter. Plus he's played a great pre-season.
This is a placeholder
Offline shanks2122  
#6 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 1:21:18 PM(UTC)
shanks2122

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 125
Joined: 8/10/2008(UTC)
Location: Billings, MT

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 5

ill be really upset if they get rid of martin but i could see them tradeing KGB
blank
Offline Since69  
#7 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 1:32:20 PM(UTC)
Since69

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,133
Joined: 11/2/2006(UTC)

Applause Given: 83
Applause Received: 81

What about Chillar? I really like his ability to play MLB and OLB, but last night Bishop showed he could do that, too.

Agreed that Ruvell Martin is tradeable, but Rodgers seems to like him. And there's no way I'd trade James Jones unless someone made me an offer I couldn't refuse.

KGB is another interesting possibility, but I wouldn't, seeing how we haven't shown that we can generate pressure without him.
UserPostedImage
Offline zombieslayer  
#8 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 1:44:45 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Posts: 9,919
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Ruvell Martin tops the list in my book.. for most teams he would be a solid #3 or #4.. James Jones would draw a ton of interest as well.. but I don't think we would part with a player coming into his second year with the potential that he has. It would take a heck of a deal for us to move him IMO.

Bishop probably has more value than Hodge based on the injury factor... but IMO he is too good to let go without a lot of value coming back to the Packers.

If I am the Packers staff.. I seriously look at Bishop, Hawk and Barnett in some configuration as the starters of this team. Bishop is a thumper that could really sew up the middle of our defense at the Point of Attack.. Barnett and Hawk could play the wings.. the issue there is Barnett's affection to the middle backer spot.


Rodgers would be pissed if we traded R Martin.

Bishop, Hawk, and Barnett, hmm....
I'll have to think about that one. You are right though that Barnett loves the middle spot too much. And he's dang good at it, so I think he stays there.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)

2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. Ted Thompson Mike McCarthy Aaron Rodgers
Offline zombieslayer  
#9 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 1:46:35 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Posts: 9,919
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Who are our tradeable assts as cuts etc. take place in the next 24 hrs?

Bishop or Hodge?
Tracy White?
Colledge?
Morency?
Brohm?
KGB?


KGB would get us good value. Not too many teams have part-time players who get 9.5 sacks. With the top tier teams all having sick passing attacks (with the exception of the Giants), a pass rushing specialist would be good for getting past the hump.

Actually, now that I think more about that, forget it. Let's keep KGB one more year.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)

2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. Ted Thompson Mike McCarthy Aaron Rodgers
Offline Pack93z  
#10 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 1:53:55 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Posts: 12,755
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 381
Applause Received: 1,027

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post


Rodgers would be pissed if we traded R Martin.


If the offseason was any lesson here in Green Bay.. players don't run this team.. if moving Martin is a good business decision, then you pull the trigger on the deal regardless of Rodgers personal feelings about it. IMO.

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post

Bishop, Hawk, and Barnett, hmm....
I'll have to think about that one. You are right though that Barnett loves the middle spot too much. And he's dang good at it, so I think he stays there.


Barnett is a heck of a middle backer.. but he also gets swallowed up in the blocking at times as well.. with his speed and agility he would be a prototypical outside backer.. no doubt he has a world of talent. IMO, Bishop or even Hodge would provide more stoutness to the center of the defense.. Bishop and especially Hodge don't have the same type of range to play the outside as say Barnett..

Now before I get pummeled, I not saying move Barnett, I am saying be open to putting the three best players on the field at one time.. IMO, those are the 3 best LB'ers on this squad.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline TheEngineer  
#11 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 1:56:01 PM(UTC)
TheEngineer

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,621
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)


Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post


Rodgers would be pissed if we traded R Martin.


If the offseason was any lesson here in Green Bay.. players don't run this team.. if moving Martin is a good business decision, then you pull the trigger on the deal regardless of Rodgers personal feelings about it. IMO.

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post

Bishop, Hawk, and Barnett, hmm....
I'll have to think about that one. You are right though that Barnett loves the middle spot too much. And he's dang good at it, so I think he stays there.


Barnett is a heck of a middle backer.. but he also gets shallowed up in the blocking at times as well.. with his speed and agility he would be a prototypical outside backer.. no doubt he has a world of talent. IMO, Bishop or even Hodge would provide more stoutness to the center of the defense.. Bishop and especially Hodge don't have the same type of range to play the outside as say Barnett..

Now before I get pummeled, I not saying move Barnett, I am saying be open to putting the three best players on the field at one time.. IMO, those are the 3 best LB'ers on this squad.


If we could get a really solid DT, we would have a heck of a 3-4.
blank
Offline zombieslayer  
#12 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 2:53:25 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Posts: 9,919
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post


Now before I get pummeled, I not saying move Barnett, I am saying be open to putting the three best players on the field at one time.. IMO, those are the 3 best LB'ers on this squad.


This is a pretty good argument - getting our 3 best LB'ers on the field at the same time.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)

2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. Ted Thompson Mike McCarthy Aaron Rodgers
Offline all_about_da_packers  
#13 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 3:44:06 PM(UTC)
all_about_da_packers

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,759
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 8
Applause Received: 66

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
If we could get a really solid DT, we would have a heck of a 3-4.


I can't help but think our coaches have incorporated the 3-4 somehow, and they just haven't used it in pre-season yet.

I mean how could they not? We've got a heck of a LB group, the with our top 4 of Hawk/Barnett/Chillar/Popp it should've given our coaches the impetus to find a package other than the 2-4 D to get our LB group on the field even more.

The strong play of Bishop and Hodge should just have hit home the possibilities with our roster of having a 3-4 package....

I swear I'd do back flips (which I can't actually do) if I saw a 3-4 package being used by the Pack on MNF. I'd be like a girl having gotten her first kiss from the boy she likes....
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Offline zombieslayer  
#14 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 3:47:56 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Posts: 9,919
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
If we could get a really solid DT, we would have a heck of a 3-4.


I can't help but think our coaches have incorporated the 3-4 somehow, and they just haven't used it in pre-season yet.

I mean how could they not? We've got a heck of a LB group, the with our top 4 of Hawk/Barnett/Chillar/Popp it should've given our coaches the impetus to find a package other than the 2-4 D to get our LB group on the field even more.

The strong play of Bishop and Hodge should just have hit home the possibilities with our roster of having a 3-4 package....

I swear I'd do back flips (which I can't actually do) if I saw a 3-4 package being used by the Pack on MNF. I'd be like a girl having gotten her first kiss from the boy she likes....


If we keep 7 LBs, you can bet your Greg Jennings underoos that we'll incorporate a 3-4 package.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)

2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. Ted Thompson Mike McCarthy Aaron Rodgers
Offline Bigbyfan  
#15 Posted : Friday, August 29, 2008 3:48:04 PM(UTC)
Bigbyfan

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 815
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 21
Applause Received: 71

Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: " Go to Quoted Post
If we could get a really solid DT, we would have a heck of a 3-4.


I can't help but think our coaches have incorporated the 3-4 somehow, and they just haven't used it in pre-season yet.

I mean how could they not? We've got a heck of a LB group, the with our top 4 of Hawk/Barnett/Chillar/Popp it should've given our coaches the impetus to find a package other than the 2-4 D to get our LB group on the field even more.

The strong play of Bishop and Hodge should just have hit home the possibilities with our roster of having a 3-4 package....

I swear I'd do back flips (which I can't actually do) if I saw a 3-4 package being used by the Pack on MNF. I'd be like a girl having gotten her first kiss from the boy she likes....


We have done some plays during the preseason where they only use two D-linemen and a ton of LB's so maybe they will do a 3-4
blank
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

Recent Topics
6m / Green Bay Packers Talk / mi_keys

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / MintBaconDrivel

4h / Random Babble / wpr

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / texaspackerbacker

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

13h / Around The NFL / Laser Gunns

21-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

21-Aug / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

21-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

20-Aug / Random Babble / DakotaT

20-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / texaspackerbacker

20-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey


Tweeter

Copyright © 2006-2014 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.