Packers trade Damarious Randall to Browns

[Mike McCarthy]

Hey we still got Rollins

 

[GleefulGary]

I fear he seems like a better Josh Jones.

That's basically what he is. Better coverage skills, but by and large he's a box safety.

 

[mkonyn]

Maybe we put 11 defensive linemen on the field and hope the ball gets batted down at the line of scrimmage every play.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

I think the best fit for Jones could be a nickel backer/weakside ILB. He's far too inconsistent with open field tackling, but this could be cut down if he were closer to the LOS. James is a top 5, Eric Berry caliber talent. If he falls, there is no better way to immediately improve the defense.

 

[OldSchool101]

Regardless of how many Defensive picks we’ve seen early in recent past..(I admittedly showed concern about that also) its all out the window in 2018. Our primary goal is to show marked improvement, particularly in the passing D area. We have to focus on our weakness or our weakness will come into focus.

There will be some initial personnel movement that doesn’t make a lick of sense and I actually was stunned at first..even to the point that I thought I misread initial reports.

Make no mistake, we will add players through trades or FA. This was simply what I call getting the permits and laying the foundation.

We put ourselves in a position to take some focus off backup QB (there must be a sacrifice in 2018) because no way can you fill all the current vacuum holes that are left. I would argue that QB was a top 3 concerns due to the nature of the position and what just happened again in 2017. We not only avoided a substantial Veteran QB contract ($5M+ etc..) but we potentially banked $ while simultaneously deferring future QB decisions by grabbing a younger QB with more upside than Hundley (who btw, is in a contract year now).

We are now poised to get to work and from a better position draft wise. Expect the aggressiveness to continue, but with each move I believe things will come more into focus.
We talk a lot about cohesiveness, particularly at OLine. There is a wealth of talent and experience in our FO and their only job as a team is assembling a machine that has all parts working in conjunction without friction (Randall..cough cough) holding it back.

I believe while our FO initial move wasn’t “****”.. they made the toughest decision first and although it might not be “the story” of the week and admittedly left many of us dumbfounded... remember like anything in life good things come to those who are patient. I’d much rather be on a team that “wears well”. The flashy signings of guys like Sherman going to 49rs don’t always end well and my gut immediately told me they either break even, or lose big on that deal. No thank you

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I really don’t get why everyone is dismissing the reality that Kizer was way more highly regarded coming out than Hundley and is two years younger in his development. Statistically, it’s way more likely that Kizer rebounds and proves valuable than Hundley. It’s irrational to consider them equally likely to be successful. Just seems like more of the same willful pessimism parading as objectivity.

There are definitely posters around here that are way too negative but several others on the forum tending towards the other end of the spectrum are pretty annoying too.

Once again, I'm advocating to wait until at least after the draft to make any evaluations about Gutekunst's moves for this offseason. While I have a hard time understanding members suggesting to open a fire BG thread before the start of free agency I get tired of others guaranteeing that Kizer will be an upgrade over Hundley or that the Packers will adequately improve the cornerback position in free agency as well.

Here's my thinking though. Word was we were trying to extend Rodgers, what if the early talks weren't going well? What if we aren't convinced he will be healthy this year?

Having a backup you can count on to at least evaluate people is important. Did Hundley even play well enough to evaluate the rest of the offense? I don't believe so.

So, possibilities:

1. We want to clear salary from the Cap for Rodgers Extension (or Free Agent that's coming no idea what position)
2. We want to push Rodger's confidence up, so he does come back, brought in someone who can play well enough for a game or two, but not enough to replace him if he gets injured.
3. We might be looking to do more than Kizer at QB... May be we are going to look to take a QB in the 1st, and want to be ready to trade up if that's what it takes, to groom Rodgers replacement. (Especially if recovery or contract negotiations have gone sour.)
4. It would be severely ironic, if Rodgers refused to agree to a deal in time to help the team, and ended up traded to the Jets for their high pick.

So what Rookie QB do you like best? Rosen? Darnold? Allen? Rudolph?

no idea.


(note I"m in no way advocating we trade Rodgers, but is entirely possible this pick is entirely about the Vikings. If they are landing Cousins, we need more firepower on defense, and Randall was going to be a liability.)

The Packers need a backup quarterback capable of winnig some games if Rodgers is forced to miss time again. Other than that I'm absolutely convinced this trade has nothing to do with Rodgers' recovery or the contract negotiations with him.

FWIW trading Randall definitely didn't improve the firepower on defense.

Just as Kizer, being the guy we traded for, is never going to be good and it’s a random spin of the wheel to even suggest he could even be better than Brett Hundley.

I don't have a problem with a poster suggesting that Kizer could end up being better than Hundley as that's a distinct possibility. I take issue with someone guaranteeing it though.

We need an upgrade of #2 QB just a badly as a TE or Guard.

First and foremost the Packers need to improve at edge rusher and cornerback entering free agency.

I think its funny how, to some people, Randall is now a starting cornerback. That's hilarious. Probably the same people that have been bagging on him for years. Terrible pick by TT to take a Safety in the 1st to play CB! Remember?!

Randall definitely hasn't lived up to being drafted in the first round during his tenure with the Packers therefore taking a look at the team trading him in a vacuum isn't a big deal. It's alarming if you consider that the depth chart at cornerback currently consists of King, Rollins, Hawkins and Pipkins though.

Make no mistake, we will add players through trades or FA. This was simply what I call getting the permits and laying the foundation.

I would argue that QB was a top 3 concerns due to the nature of the position and what just happened again in 2017.

We are now poised to get to work and from a better position draft wise.

There is a wealth of talent and experience in our FO and their only job as a team is assembling a machine that has all parts working in conjunction without friction (Randall..cough cough) holding it back.

Once again, there's no guarantee the Packers front office will be able to acquire any of the players they target in free agency or trades.

Entering this offseason I considered edge rusher, cornerback and tight end as being the positions in pressing need of an upgrade. Trading away the most talented player at one of those positions definitely didn't improve the position the team is in heading into free agency.

As a side note, while it's possible the Packers front office is extremely talented most of the guys don't have a whole lot of experience in their current jobs.

 

[Coach C.]

More details to follow.[/QUOTE
Richard Sherman Signed 3 year deal With 49ers

 

[Coach C.]

What did they get??? This leads me to think Richard Sherman might be coming

Richard Sherman Sighed 3 year deal with 49ers on Saturday..

 

[bigbubbatd]

If the Packers signed one of the top cbs when would you draft cb? Day you get trumaine Johnson to go with Kevin King. That is a solid start. Yet you still need at least one more cb. Then you still have to decide if you have a safety to start next to Dix.

 

[PackAttack12]

I really don't understand some of the criticisms with this trade. Randall was a basket case early in the season last year and apparently was still causing some issues in the locker room. For us to have swapped picks with Cleveland, not only is it possible to get the better yield in the draft, it improves BGK's trade arsenal.

To call this a bad deal is to assume that BGK doesn't have a plan to address CB. As of the present, I am going to give him the benefit of doubt.

We won't know the true value of this trade until we see what we end up doing with the two draft selections we improved upon. And that's not even mentioning DK coming back as well. If he proves to be better than Hundley (not a difficult task), he's the cheaper long term option to backup Rodgers anyway. AND he would turn into a more valuable trade asset as well.

The possibilities with this trade make it a huge win for the Packers, IMO. I like the aggressiveness from BGK.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I really don't understand some of the criticisms with this trade. Randall was a basket case early in the season last year and apparently was still causing some issues in the locker room. For us to have swapped picks with Cleveland, not only is it possible to get the better yield in the draft, it improves BGK's trade arsenal.

To call this a bad deal is to assume that BGK doesn't have a plan to address CB. As of the present, I am going to give him the benefit of doubt.

We won't know the true value of this trade until we see what we end up doing with the two draft selections we improved upon. And that's not even mentioning DK coming back as well. If he proves to be better than Hundley (not a difficult task), he's the cheaper long term option to backup Rodgers anyway. AND he would turn into a more valuable trade asset as well.

The possibilities with this trade make it a huge win for the Packers, IMO. I like the aggressiveness from BGK.

I'm sorry but there's no way any Packers fan should consider the trade a huge win for the team at this point. There are currently too many uncertainties in how Gutekunst will upgrade the cornerback position and Kizer's play to fairly evalute the deal.

I definitely like that the Packers moved up in the fourth and fifth round though.

 

[PackAttack12]

I'm sorry but there's no way any Packers fan should consider the trade a huge win for the team at this point. There are currently too many uncertainties in how Gutekunst will upgrade the cornerback position and Kizer's play to fairly evalute the deal.

I definitely like that the Packers moved up in the fourth and fifth round though.

On the surface it could be perceived as sketchy. But on the plus side, I also highly doubt that BGK pulled the trigger on this deal without a solid plan at CB.

I'm okay with BGK being a chess player. I'm going to judge his finished product.

I'm asking myself this question. Does the team have more assets now, or two days ago? I think the answer to that question is now.

 

[AmishMafia]

On the surface it could be perceived as sketchy. But on the plus side, I also highly doubt that BGK pulled the trigger on this deal without a solid plan at CB.

I'm okay with BGK being a chess player. I'm going to judge his finished product.

I'm asking myself this question. Does the team have more assets now, or two days ago? I think the answer to that question is now.

Not to mention we have limited information on why this was done. There maybe more to the story than we know.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

On the surface it could be perceived as sketchy. But on the plus side, I also highly doubt that BGK pulled the trigger on this deal without a solid plan at CB.

I'm okay with BGK being a chess player. I'm going to judge his finished product.

I'm asking myself this question. Does the team have more assets now, or two days ago? I think the answer to that question is now.

I'm absolutely convinced Gutekunst has a plan to improve the cornerback position but it's possible that he won't be able to finalize all the moves he has in mind.

Once again, I agree that it doesn't make sense to evaluate his moves before at least the end of the draft but in my opinion it's not true the Packers currently have more valuable assets right now than they did before trading Randall for Kizer.

 

[OldSchool101]

Once again, there's no guarantee the Packers front office will be able to acquire any of the players they target in free agency or trades

There’s no guarantees they will fail and miss at every turn. It works both ways.

As a side note, while it's possible the Packers front office is extremely talented most of the guys don't have a whole lot of experience in their current jobs.

Just between Murphy, Ball and Gute they possess more than 50 years of experience in the personnel area (not to mention assistants and finally we can add coaches, thank you Murphy)

What TT possessed in raw experience, he lost in promoting segregation of his area of responsibility to his internal department. By doing that he alienated the opinions and power of the coaches experience, by limiting their input and effectiveness on the outcome of his personnel decisions.
He took an partisan approach with his colleagues and that handicapped the entire system to some degree rather than working as a unit.
We know this because of the resulting changes in power structure and oversight, that overhaul wasn't just a coincidence.
So much so, that Murphy changed the entire infrastructure to allow open communication between coaching and personnel in all matters.
I’m very comfortable with the experience this group has and calling them inexperienced is a stretch.

 

[Mavster]

The Packers became a worse team after this trade, and at the same time opened up an even bigger hole at the corner back position. I'm sure Gute has a plan, its literally his job to have one. But the Packers got rid of a starting corner for a backup QB that hopefully will never have to play any time soon. It'll be curious to see what direction we go in during the rest of this offseason. So far we've started it off with a head scratcher to say the least.

 

[AKCheese]

... and for a period of time when I reroof, my house is more susceptible to rain. The Packers have more VALUE after this trade, that doesn’t mean that value is currently assigned in all the proper places.

 

[Mondio]

I wouldn't call this trade or win or a loss. On the surface it doesn't seem like we've come out ahead, we pretty much gave our only starting DB to someone else and got a guy we hope never sees the field. But that would be a pretty myopic way of looking at it. At this point we got rid of a guy we have no plans with for the future for a guy another team didn't have any plans with for the future. We moved up to the beginning of some middle rounds, where historically we've found some good guys. But at the end of the day, nothing about this trade will be determined for months or years. Right now we seemingly created another hole, but is it really if they didn't want to deal with him anymore anyway? and we have the potential of doing a lot better with this, and a move like this is done with a plan in mind. I'm sure they aren't thinking that Randall for Kizer makes the team instantly better. Unless Randall was that much of a problem, in which case, why did Wolf and hightower and company give the green light to bring him to Cleveland?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

There’s no guarantees they will fail and miss at every turn. It works both ways.

You're absolutely right about that but as of right now the team that will hopefully take the majority of meaningful snaps got weaker.

There’s no guarantees they will fail and miss at every turn. It works both ways. Just between Murphy, Ball and Gute they possess more than 50 years of experience in the personnel area (not to mention assistants and finally we can add coaches, thank you Murphy)

Gutekunst doesn't have any experience in making the final decisions though. In addition Jon-Eric Sullivan and John Wojciechowski have worked in their respective jobs before.

... and for a period of time when I reroof, my house is more susceptible to rain. The Packers have more VALUE after this trade, that doesn’t mean that value is currently assigned in all the proper places.

Don't get me wrong, the trade might work out perfectly for the Packers. But the team definitely doesn't possess more value as of right now.

 

[sschind]

I'm sorry but there's no way any Packers fan should consider the trade a huge win for the team at this point. There are currently too many uncertainties in how Gutekunst will upgrade the cornerback position and Kizer's play to fairly evalute the deal.

I definitely like that the Packers moved up in the fourth and fifth round though.

Yes the CB position is weaker right now but I think we will be able to replace Randall pretty easily plus we got QB who is at least as good with a much higher upside, IMO, and we move up in two rounds of the draft. In that respect I think its a win. A huge win? Maybe not but definitely a win. When you add in Randall's apparent negative locker room impact it makes it even more of a win.

What the improvement will be over last year at the CB position is still a big question mark but that question mark would have been there even if the trade hadn't happened and we were still relying on Randall.

 

[shockerx]

I wouldn't call this trade or win or a loss. On the surface it doesn't seem like we've come out ahead, we pretty much gave our only starting DB to someone else and got a guy we hope never sees the field. But that would be a pretty myopic way of looking at it. At this point we got rid of a guy we have no plans with for the future for a guy another team didn't have any plans with for the future. We moved up to the beginning of some middle rounds, where historically we've found some good guys. But at the end of the day, nothing about this trade will be determined for months or years. Right now we seemingly created another hole, but is it really if they didn't want to deal with him anymore anyway? and we have the potential of doing a lot better with this, and a move like this is done with a plan in mind. I'm sure they aren't thinking that Randall for Kizer makes the team instantly better. Unless Randall was that much of a problem, in which case, why did Wolf and hightower and company give the green light to bring him to Cleveland?

i think we traded "holes" we had to address Hundley he not the answer.. we were in need of a back up QB...value was going to be spent one way or the other. And Randell will now be all pro safety for Wolf. ugh.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yes the CB position is weaker right now but I think we will be able to replace Randall pretty easily plus we got QB who is at least as good with a much higher upside, IMO, and we move up in two rounds of the draft. In that respect I think its a win.

What the improvement will be over last year at the CB position is still a big question mark but that question mark would have been there even if the trade hadn't happened and we were still relying on Randall.

Cornerback is a huge question mark entering free agency and the Packers haven't had any success replacing players at the position they let walk away over the past few years.

Therefore replacing an average player like Randall isn't an easy task. Actually improving the talent level in the secondary over last season might prove to be even tougher.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Cornerback is a huge question mark entering free agency and the Packers haven't had any success replacing players at the position they let walk away over the past few years.

Therefore replacing an average player like Randall isn't an easy task. Actually improving the talent level in the secondary over last season might prove to be even tougher.

If nothing else, doesn't everything you wrote show you just how little the Packers thought of Randall and his future in GB by making this trade? I think some want to think he was on the rise in Green Bay. However, trading him away for a 2nd year backup QB and improved draft positions in the 4th and 5th wouldn't be equal compensation if the Packer organization thought they were trading away one of their best future options of fixing a position that has been in need for far too long.

People may not like the trade, but I think those people had far more hope and confidence in Randall than the Packers did. I'm trusting that the end of year player reviews and probably input from Pettine, had Randall basically out of Green Bay once a decent trade could be had.

 

[PackAttack12]

If Randall was a problem in the locker room and the team felt like it was passed the point of no return, he had to be dealt. I think that's a huge part of the equation that some are missing here.

 

[Mondio]

If Randall was a problem in the locker room and the team felt like it was passed the point of no return, he had to be dealt. I think that's a huge part of the equation that some are missing here.

But parts of that equation are now with the Browns. It's not as if they don't have a pretty good idea of what Randall is too. Or do we believe that one of their top scouts and a guy who many wanted to be the new Packers GM were oblivious to what Randall was while they were here?

So why if he's such a problem do Wolf and Highsmith bring him on board? Obviously the Packers didn't want him or they would t I've traded him, but it's not as easy as, well he was a problem. Because that big of problems don't follow top front office guys to new teams