Report: Jets Deal for Aaron Rodgers Includes ’23 and ’24 Round 2 Picks, Deal Held up Over Protection if Rodgers Walks After Season

[GTB999]

8 hours ago, jetfan40yrs said:

As an addendum, if GB is hesitant at the time they have to pay AR, JD can just sweeten the offer slightly (nothing in the 2's or 1's) that can draw GB enough to accept.

Agreed.  If Jets hold out until Sept, GB will likely accept whatever is offered.  The risk to the Jets is if another team's QB gets injured and decide to go after Rodgers.  Then Jets are stuck with Wilson and front office gets fired.  Deal is going to get done before the draft.  Cost will be a 2 in 2023 and a 2 in 2024.  This is first round equivalent which was what GB was looking for.

[BornJetsFan1983]

18 minutes ago, GTB999 said:

Agreed.  If Jets hold out until Sept, GB will likely accept whatever is offered.  The risk to the Jets is if another team's QB gets injured and decide to go after Rodgers.  Then Jets are stuck with Wilson and front office gets fired.  Deal is going to get done before the draft.  Cost will be a 2 in 2023 and a 2 in 2024.  This is first round equivalent which was what GB was looking for.

Looney toons. Never going to happen. Green bay ain getting a first or equivalent. That is. It fair compensation.

Front office just had best draft any team has had in for ever. It's team changing.

Not getting fired no way buddy

[choon328]

14 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

This would be a terrible deal...Two things:

1) If Douglas makes a trade like this it is completely contrary to everything he's done and preached for four years.  The four year rebuild he was pitching about "doing things the right way" would have been a complete and utter waste of three years.  Just a disaster.

I get he missed on the QB - but he shouldn't be throwing everything away because of it.  Negotiating against ourselves is a traditional Jet move - but I thought JD was better than that.

2) With that said - this has Woody written all over it - and It's completely out of JD's hands.

What is he throwing away exactly? One 2nd rd pick this year and one 2nd next year is going to make or break the future of this franchise? Come on now. A trade down 4 or 5 spots in the 1st round gets them a 3rd rd pick and then they have a pick in each of the 1st 3 rounds again. This isn't that serious

[choon328]

12 hours ago, nycdan said:

The only downside is there is no secret that the Jets would be targeting an OT.  Any team below us should be talking to HOU (12) and TEN (11) if they want to move up.

I am not sure the OT position is as big as a need to the Jets front office as it is to some fans. It's pretty evident the only reason Duane Brown came back was bc he was told he'd start and Rodgers would be the QB. Then they're going to have Mitchell and Becton compete for the RT spot. If they get Ben Jones then I don't think they are going offensive line till the middle to late rounds.  

I think they're going to trade down and then draft defense in the 1st or if 1 of the QBs slip to them at 13 I could see them taking one. 

[choon328]

4 hours ago, GTB999 said:

Agreed.  If Jets hold out until Sept, GB will likely accept whatever is offered.  The risk to the Jets is if another team's QB gets injured and decide to go after Rodgers.  Then Jets are stuck with Wilson and front office gets fired.  Deal is going to get done before the draft.  Cost will be a 2 in 2023 and a 2 in 2024.  This is first round equivalent which was what GB was looking for.

No matter how GB fans would like to spin it a middle of the round 2nd and most likely a late 2nd the following year is not equivalent to a 1st bc the future pick is devalued a round.  

[FidelioJet]

12 hours ago, Zachtomims47 said:

If going for it all means not picking in the 2nd round for one year, I think we’ll be okay. 

Well, it's giving up two second round picks.  Justify it however you want.

It's a bad trade.

[neckdemon]

1 hour ago, choon328 said:

What is he throwing away exactly? One 2nd rd pick this year and one 2nd next year is going to make or break the future of this franchise? Come on now. A trade down 4 or 5 spots in the 1st round gets them a 3rd rd pick and then they have a pick in each of the 1st 3 rounds again. This isn't that serious

a fair deal almost always ends up with both sides feeling like they had to compromise and either give up more than they wanted or receive less than they wanted

[neckdemon]

9 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Well, it's giving up two second round picks.  Justify it however you want.

It's a bad trade.

question for you....
say rodgers plays for 2 years. 1st year we win the division but lose a championship game. 2nd year we win the superbowl. then he retires. is that still a bad trade?

[FidelioJet]

1 hour ago, choon328 said:

One 2nd rd pick this year and one 2nd next year is going to make or break the future of this franchise? Come on now.

I have to be honest, but this is a very weak argument.  Then why not throw in a 1st for good measure?  I mean it won't make or break the franchise.  You trade for the market value - when you're the only bidder the value should be low.

1 hour ago, choon328 said:

A trade down 4 or 5 spots in the 1st round gets them a 3rd rd pick and then they have a pick in each of the 1st 3 rounds again.

If you had your 2 2nd's you could still do that.  All the justify this away does change what you're giving up.  You're giving up 2 2nd round picks - and those carry a lot of value - that is just a reality.

2 #2's for a 40 year old, declining QB, coming off his worst season as a pro - that just 3 weeks ago told us he was 90% sure he was going to retire.  All the while bidding solely against yourself.

Look, Aaron Rodgers will be a Jet and I'll be rooting for him and the team....But it doesn't change the fact that the trade value here is a weak.  

[FidelioJet]

1 minute ago, neckdemon said:

question for you....
say rodgers plays for 2 years. 1st year we win the division but lose a championship game. 2nd year we win the superbowl. then he retires. is that still a bad trade?

Yes.

[Jojo's jets]

Yes? Bc all the draft picks since 1969 has won numerous super bowls for the jets. Have to keep all those draft picks bc they have been so successful for the jets in winning championships. 

[T0mShane]

10 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Yes.

Crazy

[neckdemon]

10 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Yes.

lol thats the worst take ever. we trade 2 2nd round picks for a division championship, a afc championship and then a superbowl win. thats a great trade!! for a franchise that has basically sucked since 1969.....

[UntouchableCrew]

13 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Yes.

That’s the dumbest sh*t I’ve ever heard.

[UntouchableCrew]

1 minute ago, neckdemon said:

lol thats the worst take ever. we trade 2 2nd round picks for a division championship, a afc championship and then a superbowl win. thats a great trade!! for a franchise that has basically sucked since 1969.....

It would be the greatest trade in franchise history.

[neckdemon]

Just now, UntouchableCrew said:

It would be the greatest trade in franchise history.

right?? he'd rather have 2 2nd round draft picks over a championship. make it make sense!!!

[T0mShane]

Btw, DT is now the Jets #1 draft need. Mazi Smith hive stand up. 

 

[Barton]

It’s reasonable but 2 2nd rd picks is alittle disappointing. That’s essentially the value of a 1st rd pick. A 2 and a 4 with conditions seems better but whatever. It is Aaron Rodgers. 

[FidelioJet]

21 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

Crazy

Nope.

If he had said would it be worth it - I would say absolutely YES!

Surely it's worth it for us to win a Super Bowl.  But if you told me we gave up 5 first round picks to do that I would say it would be worth it.  Heck, even a lot more than that.

But that wasn't the question - the question was, was it a good trade?  That answer doesn't change - it is a resounding NO!   2 2nd round picks, bidding against yourself, for a one maybe two year rental of a 40 year old declining QB - is not a good trade. 

[bicketybam]

Well, it's giving up two second round picks.  Justify it however you want.
It's a bad trade.

I missed it were they announced the trade. All we have is speculation. Maybe we should pump the brakes until we get the final deal.

[FidelioJet]

6 minutes ago, bicketybam said:

51 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Well, it's giving up two second round picks.  Justify it however you want.
It's a bad trade.

I missed it were they announced the trade. All we have is speculation. Maybe we should pump the brakes until we get the final deal.

Sure.  We're talking about this scenario...and it would be a bad trade.  

Honestly, I would be surprised if this is what it turned out to be be.  JD is better than this.

But it would be a bad trade.

[T0mShane]

14 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Nope.

If he had said would it be worth it - I would say absolutely YES!

Surely it's worth it for us to win a Super Bowl.  But if you told me we gave up 5 first round picks to do that I would say it would be worth it.  Heck, even a lot more than that.

But that wasn't the question - the question was, was it a good trade?  That answer doesn't change - it is a resounding NO!   2 2nd round picks, bidding against yourself, for a one maybe two year rental of a 40 year old declining QB - is not a good trade. 

Semantics!

[JazzyJet]

It is so SOJF (same ole Jet fans) to be bent out of shape over losing two 2nd round picks in exchange for a chance at realistic championship run. Even if you don't really think it's that realistic we literally have nothing to lose, you have to shoot your shot.

Looking at our success rate in the 2nd round over the past 20 years - the only guys that are really true difference makers were David Harris and Breece Hall. You could argue over how valuable guys like Lamont Jordan, Victor Hobson, and Marcus Maye were, but those were not guys that you couldn't get the same contribution from either later in the draft or from FA, cuts, waiver, etc. ---- two 2nds for a shot....DO IT.

[choon328]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

I have to be honest, but this is a very weak argument.  Then why not throw in a 1st for good measure?  I mean it won't make or break the franchise.  You trade for the market value - when you're the only bidder the value should be low.

If you had your 2 2nd's you could still do that.  All the justify this away does change what you're giving up.  You're giving up 2 2nd round picks - and those carry a lot of value - that is just a reality.

2 #2's for a 40 year old, declining QB, coming off his worst season as a pro - that just 3 weeks ago told us he was 90% sure he was going to retire.  All the while bidding solely against yourself.

Look, Aaron Rodgers will be a Jet and I'll be rootg for him and the team....But it doesn't change the fact that the trade value here is a weak.  

You're giving up 2 2nd round picks for a guy who won back to back MVP awards 15 months ago.  I get what you're saying about being the only bidder and the Jets can say whatever they want but they want Rodgers in the building ASAP and for this to be done ASAP.  Could they hold strong and offer a 3rd this year and a conditional 4th next year?  Yeah they could.  But the Packers will then drag this out to training camp and that's as equally bad for the Jets as it is the Packers.  The Jets FA has come to a grinding halt in part b/c this deal is not completed and so you give a little to get this done.   The Packers are still the ones not getting near the value that they want. 

I'd like to wait and see exactly what the deal is because the Packers may be eating a lot of the guaranteed money over the next year or two in order to get that second 2nd round pick.  We have to see the details first.

[Bobby816]

2 2nds I don’t mind. I just want it to be a SB appearance next year the only way it goes to a 1st. I think the loose conditions we’ve heard so far are way too loose for it to go to a 1st.

[Sammybighead]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

Yes.

If this is truly your answer, not sure what would make you happy as a fan. 

You'd be the only guy at the championship parade visibly pouting about a couple picks. 

[Sammybighead]

32 minutes ago, JazzyJet said:

It is so SOJF (same ole Jet fans) to be bent out of shape over losing two 2nd round picks in exchange for a chance at realistic championship run. Even if you don't really think it's that realistic we literally have nothing to lose, you have to shoot your shot.

Looking at our success rate in the 2nd round over the past 20 years - the only guys that are really true difference makers were David Harris and Breece Hall. You could argue over how valuable guys like Lamont Jordan, Victor Hobson, and Marcus Maye were, but those were not guys that you couldn't get the same contribution from either later in the draft or from FA, cuts, waiver, etc. ---- two 2nds for a shot....DO IT.

I'll say this. Just cause we suck at picking a good player in the 2nd doesn't mean they're not valuable. 

That said, your first point is dead on. I would have stomached almost anything that didn't involve #13 outright. 

[T0mShane]

 

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, choon328 said:

I am not sure the OT position is as big as a need to the Jets front office as it is to some fans. It's pretty evident the only reason Duane Brown came back was bc he was told he'd start and Rodgers would be the QB. Then they're going to have Mitchell and Becton compete for the RT spot. If they get Ben Jones then I don't think they are going offensive line till the middle to late rounds.  

I think they're going to trade down and then draft defense in the 1st or if 1 of the QBs slip to them at 13 I could see them taking one. 

This.

If a no-brainer opportunity for a can’t miss, younger, long term LT is there (Orlando Brown), sure made that effort. Maybe that “effort” also includes #13 overall but (perhaps depending which of the big 3 is still there) I don’t think they’re totally locked in on that.

Having D.Brown still being a very start-able LT, at $9MM, is a good opportunity to use a day 2-3 pick to learn from and groom behind this pro’s pro for the season, because you just don’t use the #13 pick on an OLman and then not start him right away unless he’s injured, as it’s an all-or-none snaps position.

Other thing with Brown is at this point, so long as he’s not suffering physically, it would appear he sees his career inevitably winding down soon & just wants to play as long as he can so there are no regrets that he didn’t play that one last season while he still could. FFS he played most of the season with an IR-quality shoulder injury that robbed this huge man of a lot of his brute strength pushing or (perhaps even more) pulling. Easy guy to like in the mix, so long as he’s still playing well, and to like them having in the locker room.

Anyway the very advantage to a pipeline strategy is the starters don’t all cost high draft picks and expensive veteran contracts. So they may feel the overall team is better served trading down at least into the mid/late 20s, take a center there while adding another day 2 pick, then take a LB at #43, and a ‘24 LT/RT starter (and current depth) with the newly added day 2 pick. Three long term starters instead of two, and they aren’t pigeonholing themselves into starting two rookies on the OL with ‘22 dud Tomlinson between them.

The truth is in terms of how things exist today, the need is a plan for a ‘24 starting tackle more than some emergency of swapping in/out a ‘23 tackle.

[Bobby816]

3 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

 

Now this is better than yesterdays report.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

Sure.  We're talking about this scenario...and it would be a bad trade.  

Honestly, I would be surprised if this is what it turned out to be be.  JD is better than this.

But it would be a bad trade.

LMAO ? 

In a vacuum we all prefer giving up less in a trade. Duh. The problem here is whatever overpay you perceive today, you’re being shown the goal being realized with the benefit of hindsight, and still are harping over the theoretical loss of a draft pick that may very well yield an outright bust.

If given the benefit of hindsight you’ve been given here, I’d trade the next 5 first rounders for a guaranteed one year $60MM Rodgers rental that led to a Super Bowl victory. Further, I’d do it if shown that SB win happened the following season without him.

Seek your end goal results; don’t lament about the supposedly-lesser path taken to get there.

You’re not allowing the possibility of what about if the wiser pick you theoretically “saved” is a bleh or bust rookie starter, in place of the better veteran they’d have otherwise added in March ‘24, and his lesser play leads to his committing the game-losing play in the WC or divisional round. Or if holding out on a trade until the last moment leads to poor early cohesion - never mind an AR injury - on offense that costs what may prove to be a necessary home playoff game this season, followed by Rodgers retiring after one year instead of returning for a second SB season. Perhaps further, GB or maybe a few other teams - ultimately they are all business partners, of course - maybe just won’t trade with you again for several years or more just on principle, including the additional, 3/24 move that might have put the Jets over the top.

Even if your idea of negotiating a better deal seems a sounder plan on paper today, achieving the team’s ultimate goal is always “however it had to happen” — particularly when handed the results in hindsight as you are here. Pissing on the path chosen to get there is not flattering yourself as having the rational wisdom you think.

Abbreviated, Family Guy Version:

You have been outright offered the very new boat you sought and instead still prefer the tantalizing allure of the mystery box. 

[Augustiniak]

At this point i would not be surprised if douglas believes that the closer it gets to the draft, the less compensation he’ll have to give up b/c GB will get roasted if they don’t get 2023 compensation for rodgers.  This trade could get done days before the draft. 

[FidelioJet]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

LMAO ? 

In a vacuum we all prefer giving up less in a trade. Duh. The problem here is whatever overpay you perceive today, you’re being shown the goal being realized with the benefit of hindsight, and still are harping over the theoretical loss of a draft pick that may very well yield an outright bust.

If given the benefit of hindsight you’ve been given here, I’d trade the next 5 first rounders for a guaranteed one year $60MM Rodgers rental that led to a Super Bowl victory. Further, I’d do it if shown that SB win happened the following season without him.

Seek your end goal results; don’t lament about the supposedly-lesser path taken to get there.

You’re not allowing the possibility of what about if the wiser pick you theoretically “saved” is a bleh or bust rookie starter, in place of the better veteran they’d have otherwise added in March ‘24, and his lesser play leads to his committing the game-losing play in the WC or divisional round. Or if holding out on a trade until the last moment leads to poor early cohesion - never mind an AR injury - on offense that costs what may prove to be a necessary home playoff game this season, followed by Rodgers retiring after one year instead of returning for a second SB season. Perhaps further, GB or maybe a few other teams - ultimately they are all business partners, of course - maybe just won’t trade with you again for several years or more just on principle, including the additional, 3/24 move that might have put the Jets over the top.

Even if your idea of negotiating a better deal seems a sounder plan on paper today, achieving the team’s ultimate goal is always “however it had to happen” — particularly when handed the results in hindsight as you are here. Pissing on the path chosen to get there is not flattering yourself as having the rational wisdom you think.

Abbreviated, Family Guy Version:

You have been outright offered the very new boat you sought and instead still prefer the tantalizing allure of the mystery box. 

Lol.
better analogy. 

First, for the record, I made the same point as you in a post just before the one you quoted.  

Worth it, yes.  Good trade, no.  I even said 5 1st I would say it’s worth it.  
 

I could go to a casino, play roulette, bet my house on #12.  

Smart idea to make that bet? I think not. 

If #12 hits, was it worth it? Sure.  I never have to work another day in my life.  So good bet.  

Rodgers will be a Jet and it’s starting to look like we’re giving up 2 2’s for him.  It might work out, it might not.  

Look, I’m super exited for him to be a Jet.  But I think, under the circumstances, we’re far overpaying.  
I’m not going to harp on it once it’s done.  I’ll be happy to have him - and the shot at a Super Bowl. 
I just expected Joe to do better.   

[neckdemon]

5 hours ago, FidelioJet said:

Nope.

If he had said would it be worth it - I would say absolutely YES!

Surely it's worth it for us to win a Super Bowl.  But if you told me we gave up 5 first round picks to do that I would say it would be worth it.  Heck, even a lot more than that.

But that wasn't the question - the question was, was it a good trade?  That answer doesn't change - it is a resounding NO!   2 2nd round picks, bidding against yourself, for a one maybe two year rental of a 40 year old declining QB - is not a good trade. 

This is some real mental gymnastics to try to justify your answer. You can't say it's a bad trade but it was worth it. Being worth it makes it a good trade. You can't eat your cake and have it too

[Integrity28]

6 hours ago, choon328 said:

I am not sure the OT position is as big as a need to the Jets front office as it is to some fans. It's pretty evident the only reason Duane Brown came back was bc he was told he'd start and Rodgers would be the QB. Then they're going to have Mitchell and Becton compete for the RT spot. If they get Ben Jones then I don't think they are going offensive line till the middle to late rounds.  

I think they're going to trade down and then draft defense in the 1st or if 1 of the QBs slip to them at 13 I could see them taking one. 

Yeah, this has been my viewpoint. I think the depth at LT might come from the draft or as a post-draft vet. I can see a plug-and-play C, perhaps.

I fully expect at least 2 new additions between now and camp on the OL. I’m not saying it’s not a problem. I think it’s a problem we don’t fully solve via draft.

I truly expect this draft to focus on C, LB, DL, S and speed on offense. Maybe TE (deep class = we should grab one here).