Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Updated: Why Not, Exactly?

Sure, the Packers probably need help elsewhere, but when Tony Gonzalez is on the market, YOU TRADE FOR TONY GONZALEZ! This is the one area where I disagree with Ted Thompson, is his inability to make the big trade (well, that, and his joke of an offensive line).

Apparently, the Chiefs were willing to give up Gonzo for a second-rounder, and Gonzalez said that he would indeed play for the Packers. But, the highest Ted Thompson would go in the discussions was for a third-rounder, and the Chiefs called his bluff.

So many things wrong with this. One, Thompson overvalues draft picks more than anybody in the league, so no other G.M. sees things the way TT does.

Two, you only offered a fourth rounder for Moss, one of the most explosive players in the game (minus last weekend), but you'd give up the third rounder for a tight end?

Third, as much as I hate to admit it, the Jets are probably going to make the playoffs this year, so we'll be getting another high draft pick there.

Four, Donald Lee. Tory Humphrey. Jermichael Finley. I like all three of these guys, but THEY ARE NO TONY GONZALEZ.

We've passed up on Moss, mistake. We passed up on Michael Turner. Bigger mistake. And now Tony Gonzalez.

I'm actually kind of mad about this one.

UPDATE: Maybe I was a little hard on Ted. Apparently, the Packers thought they did indeed have a deal in place for Gonzalez, before Carl Peterson decided to pull a fast one. Lame.

6 comments:

Jonk said...

To me, the bigger question is why the Chiefs would refuse to accept a third-rounder. They are going nowhere, Gonzalez makes oodles of money, and he's going to be 33 years old. A third-rounder is a fair return at this point.

If you think about it, no other general manager was willing to part with a second-round pick either. The Giants were linked to Gonzalez, too, but they passed.

Then again, I am firmly a member of Team Ted. If only he could solidify the rush defense -- now that would be a change I could believe in.

b2 said...

Chalk me up as a Team Ted member with Jonk. No way I offer a second. Ted did all he should have done here. Cheifs fucked up.

And about Randy Moss, hindsights 20/20 bro. A fourth rounder was borderline too much back then, and I'm still not sure I want his punk ass on the team. The way he played in Oakland, given the talent he obviously still has, is absolutely ridiculous.

Thompson overvaluing draft picks = Jennings, Rodgers, Collins, Hawk, James Jones, B Jack, Rouse, Crosby, Korey Hall, Jordy!, and many others. He "overvalues" draft picks because he owns the draft.

b2 said...

Chiefs also fucked up, not just the Cheifs.

Bear said...

Also a team ted member.... I couldn't beleive the Chiefs in this situation. Right on cue is Jonk with the fact that no other team was willing to part ways with a 3rd rounder as well. IF you really, really, really think about it, the one thing the packers don't need is another receiving threat. I mean our pass offense is rolling right now. So if you are gonna play teddy ball why spend money on another receiving threat.

I'm more surprised that the Packers were in discussion, and even more surprised the Cheifs didn't accept the 3rd rounder. Infact word is that Gonzalez was not too happy that the Cheifs didn't unload him to the Packers.

P.S. Randy Moss really was an unquantifiable entity with Oakland, do you remember how poorly he was playing there. In retrospect obviously it was a poor decision by the Packers. But hindsight is clearly 20/20 in this position, plus I highly doubt you see the type of progression Greg Jennings has made.

Bear said...

Haha, should have read B2's post first.... looks like I copied his thoughts. And apparently I cannot spell chiefs right either.

Jonk said...

Tony Gonzalez himself has told Fox's Jay Glazer:
"Last night I talked to Carl [Peterson] and I point blank asked him what it would take to get it done. I wanted to know if it could happen with a fourth. He started talking about a second and a fifth like the [Jeremy] Shockey deal. Nobody is going to trade a second for a 32-year-old tight end."

Total Pageviews

Disclaimer

This site is not affiliated with, nor endorsed or sponsored by, the University of Wisconsin.