Patty suggested something like this might be in the works.

Step 1. The Packers sign De Mulling a veteran guard from Detroit. He hasn't been much in Detroit but she thinks he was not used properly.

Step 2 Come draft time they trade an o lineman, she thinks Coston , as part of a move up. e.g. Package Coston and a 2nd to get higher in the 2nd.

I am trying to figure how this would work.

De Mulling is primarily a LG- Concievebly he could be insurance if Barbre doesn't work out. They could them move Colledge to tackle if they think he can handle it. That would leave Spitz at RG.

Or maybe it is Colledge they trade? They would have Coston, Spitz, Barbe, De Mulling at guards and sort out the starters at training camp.

They could use Colledge as part of a trade if the get a tackle in the draft.

Any other thoughts?

I obviously dont have the draft knowledge patty has, but i wouldnt think a 2nd and Coston would be good enough to move up in the 2nd. I do think Thompson will sign an o-lineman sooner or later.

According to Patty, Coston is better than most of the guards available in the draft. If a team really wanted a young guard, they might make the deal. Also, it would depend on how far up Green Bay wanted to move in the 2nd.

Huh? When did OG become our strength and deep position, that we can consider trading one of our bettr OG's? I'm soooooo confused.

Our guards are terrible...so we're going to trade one of our only decent guards?

I don't think we can trade a guard to a team to pick a guard in their spot, that would be very very hard to explain from both sides.

I think Colledge might have a future as a tackle more than as guard, Clifton won't play forever and Colledge is probably our best shot at LT.

I agree with timharris about Coston not having enough value for a trade-up and that would be absolutely anti-Thompson, he likes young players and he hates trading up so it will be unnatural for him to spend one of his drafted players to trade up.

Luis

I don't get this either. If Coston is better than the guards in the draft why would we trade him to move up and draft a guard that he's probably better than? Pretty confusing!

This idea would not have us move up to draft a guard. We woudl sign an OG (DeMulling) and then trade Coston to move from say spot 60 to 45. Then at 45, we draft a CB or something else. If Coston is better then any OG available in the draft, we woudl trade him to move up and grab a OG.

I'm sorry, but this scenario makes little sense.
Trade for a OG who has been disappointing at best. Then trade a young OG who is supposedly better than any of the guards available via. the draft?
Subtraction by subtraction.

You're right on with that Mr Yuck...


I doubt Linda Bogdan would suggest such a move. I also seriously doubt Thompson would consider such a move.

In my earlier post, I was attempting to explain why such a deal might be possible. I'm not in favor of Green Bay trading one of its young guards. I had hoped the team would add one of the outstanding guards available in free agency. If they had, a trade would ceretainly be acceptable.

Rich Demulling is a free agent. Signing him would not involve a trade. As I stated before, I believe signing DeMulling would be similar to signing Adrian Klemm. At best, I believe, DeMulling would provide veteran depth. I may, of course, be wrong.

Lot of love for Junius right now, it appears.

Let me throw in my two cents:

Right now, Coston's value comes largely through potential. Yes, he has improved since being drafted, and has had flashes of excellence. But he hasn't shown enough yet to win a starting job at the team's weakest position.

And how does a guard drafted this April offer value. That's right. Through potential.

I'm not enough of a draftnik to know what the potential in the 2nd-4th rounds are for OG. However, I can see an expert in drafting (i.e., Ted Thompson) looking at that potential and saying, well "those flashes" aren't enough. I mean, he decided that Will Whitticker didn't have enough potential to even stay on the roster after 15 games; he could well decide that Coston hasn't shown enough in 16 games to prevent another high pick for a guard if he sees more value in what he expects to be available at that pick.

He could even decide that Coston offers no more value than a later round guard, than the next Barbre would be better on a roster where that higher 2nd pick Coston yields gets used for a OT, CB, TE, or whatever.

It really depends on how Ted views the relative potential of Coston and guards available in this year's draft compared to how other GMs view that relative potential.

What leads me to be skeptical of the Coston part of this scenario going down (I really think deMulling is a separate issue) is that I have a hard time imagining another team valuing Coston more than Thompson does at this point.

I for one wouldn't mind if any current guard were traded to move up in the second round. Because, as I think everyone has figured out by now, I don't see any of our current guards (with the possible exception of Barbre) as particularly valuable. Heck, package two of them in the deal if you want.

But I'm also pretty sure that Ted sees those same guards as much more valuable than I do.

And, my gut tells me, much more valuable than the other 31 GMs see them, too.

Not that I believe it will happen , but its possible? OFFERING Coston (NOTE: he's has some talent, only 24 year old, and enterring his 4th season-experiened) along with one of packer's #2 picks-I personally could see some GM may like such a deal.

Contrary to your post, the word "same" is not a random substitute for other words in the english language. Of course the rest is barely english either, but apparently just the first bit bugs me enough to comment on.

"Not that I believe IT will happen"

Fixed.


As to the guards we have an unfortunate scenario. We have 3-4 young guys who are not as good as they apparently could be or might become. No draft pick would likely unseat them at this point. They don't have any trade value as far as I know. There was only one or maybe two guys in FA that could step in and they got paid 3-4 times what they were worth.

Sadly we are stuck with what we have. Our only hope is that we can come up with 2 OG's from these 4 guys that won't get Aaron Rodgers and Ryan Grant killed.

I hope we keep the guards we have, draft 2 in the first 4 rounds and let the competition decide a better duo than last season, wether it's by veterens being pushed, or by the new guys winning the spot outright.

if i remember right college was the weekest link.i'm hoping barbre and spitz win the G
spots,college should be the backup T either LTor RT.these players are young and i believe will improve slightly this year.we were one of the top 5 teams in the run game the last half of the season so there is reason for optimizm

The main problem with any of these trade scenarios is that:

1. TT has never traded up in his entire career.

2. TT does not value the Guard position very highly.

Thus, no trades, no free agent signings. If you want to bet, bet that we have the same several guys fighting it out the entire season for the 5 starting positions as they did last season, along with a couple of late round picks and UFAs from this year.