Comments on: Best time to trade Kampman may be in offseason

By: radioboy20010

radioboy20010 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 09:23:00 +0000

Kampman isn’t the only player miscast in a 3-4. Cullen Jenkins is very good in the 4-3, so-so in the 3-4. A.J. Hawk is far from an impact player in either scheme. Nick Barnett doesn’t work as well either.
Contracts play more of a factor in why changes aren’t being made in Green Bay. All the players have hefty contracts and other teams aren’t just willing to take it on.
Kampman should have been moved this offseason, probably with Carolina for J. Peppers. But Peppers wants Haynesworth money and “Tightwad” Ted Thompson will never pay that kind of money, period.
The Packers might be way under the salary cap, but they are handcuffed in making trades with teams that don’t want a player, even a good one, with a contract that is the 800 pound gorilla in the room.

By: packers4life

packers4life — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 01:38:52 +0000

May I ask where everyone is getting this trade idea from? I mean, seriously. I know he hasn’t been spectacular so far in the new 3-4 defense but give him some freakin’ time. It’s only been 4 games.
Plus, while he isn’t getting alot of sacks, he is still providing plenty of pressure. I even saw him knock down Favre a few times two weeks ago.
My point is, give him some time instead of throwing him under the bus right away. There isn’t any point for the Packers to trade away their best pass rusher either anyway. I gurantee he will get at least 7 sacks by seasons end.

By: SmackMyVickUp

SmackMyVickUp — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 00:28:49 +0000

Look for the Bears to make a play for him, can never have too many d-lineman.

By: SidHartman

SidHartman — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 22:00:18 +0000

Vikings fan here – always loved Kampman – plays football the right way. It’s too bad he doesn’t fit into GB’s 3-4 but Capers had to know that prior to installing the D. Where ever he is next year I hope he gets to go back to a 4-3 where he belongs. I’d love to see him on the Vikes in 2010 but that’s just a pipe dream.

By: jeremiah

jeremiah — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:40:32 +0000

MR high and mighty-
your post started off fine, but are you really comparing kampman who is an established veteran to matt cassel, a guy who had one respectable year on a team built for success?
please. i agree that kampman will be tagged at he end of the season if he is still around, but to think that the packers will only get a 3rd round pick for him is nuts! we got a third rounder for corey frickin williams. kampman will command a 3rd and a player or a 2nd at the worst. but be assured the bidding will start with a #1.
also,
FLORIO!
chad clifton is not getting franchised. you have got to be kidding me right? pretend like you know what you are talking about much?

By: greenguy09

greenguy09 — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:03:34 +0000

trading him now makes much more sense , this way you get to say where he plays . he is not suited to play LB , and not big enough to play end in this defense. they wont get a 1st rounder for him who ever thinks that is nuts , he’s too old to morage any teams 1st round pick . at best they will get a 2nd rounder maybe .

By: Koition

Koition — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 20:52:47 +0000

Huge Packer fan, and Kampy is one of my favorites… a class act.
However, it would be best to trade him now. A recent move (or lack thereof) reminds me of how this will most likely play out if they tag him… the Peppers move. Carolina tagged him and got no trade partners and the same will most likely happen to the Packers. Teams are more desperate now and are willing to trade more. Your trade partners are limited to 4-3 teams, and most likely struggling ones… the Rams, Seattle, Jaguars, etc…
The Packers have more than enough talent at LB to replace him. There may or may not be anyone as good as rushing the passer, but anyone would be better dropping back, so it’s a wash. While most people are saying Hawk and Bishop, they are both ILB. Thompson, Popps, and most likely Chillar are the likely candidates. Yes, Chillar plays ILB now, but he’s more likely to make the move outside than the other two.
Trade him for a solid T, or a high pick. You can always trade a high pick for help elsewhere. If you sit on it, teams will take advantage of the fact you’re stuck with him in a system he doesn’t fit and ask less.

By: montanabob

montanabob — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 20:23:31 +0000

Kampman is a fan favorite in Green Bay and Packer nation does not want to see this guy go. There is a lot of football left this season and I don’t think Capers sees him as a liability on the field. We have to keep Kampman, and Ted Tompson would be suicidal if he traded away another fan favorite in such a short time.
go pack!

By: longrodvanhungendong

longrodvanhungendong — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 18:33:03 +0000

Lions could sure use him but if TT gets beat by another former Packer great, then its curtains for Teddy T

By: TheBaySay

TheBaySay — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:20:38 +0000

If Tampa can get a second round pick for Gaines Adams, Packers certainly shouldn’t accept anything less for Kampman.

By: footballrulz

footballrulz — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:15:33 +0000

Keep Kampman–just play him where he gets to rush. Poppinga is freakin joke and Hawk ain’t far behind. There’s the trading material. As nerd says–get Bishop on the field at any cost. And Matthews.
Then, do something about that offensive (good one nerd), offensive line. Quick, before Rodgers gets hurt–BAD.

By: TimT

TimT — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:15:09 +0000

Trade him now. Follow Martin Mayhew’s example of last year’s Roy Williams trade. Decide what the value is and stick to your guns. An every-down 4-3 DE is worth a low-mid 1st rounder if Kampman agrees to a contract. At worst, I’d say a 2nd and 3rd.

By: DocBG

DocBG — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:13:44 +0000

They should start using him on their offensive line. He’s got no business playing OLB right now, regardless of what he did in highschool. The guy is a class act, keeping his head up, but the packers are too f-ing stupid to use a guy like they should. as thats the case, why not use him as a blocker for rodgers?

By: Maddenboy

Maddenboy — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:10:42 +0000

Please make the auto-refresh function stop.
Please. I like to come back to where I left off. So I dont miss anything. Please.
As to Kampman, he’ll be just barely “on the wrong side of 30″ and DEs are more valuable, and more highly paid, than LBs. He will learn versatility this year, for sure, but in the end, he’s a 4-3 DE
Packers have to know that, so any other scenario makes no sense.

By: TheOnly1Phenom

TheOnly1Phenom — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:55:41 +0000

Kampman to Tampa for the high 2nd round pick, not the one they just got from Chicago

By: Mr High and Mighty

Mr High and Mighty — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:54:02 +0000

They will end up franchising him just to keep him from signing with the Vikings. Not sure the Vikings would even want him since he will likely command a princely sum but they will tag him just to make sure. They will then end up getting little more than the 5th rounder they would get if he just left as a free-agent. Maybe as high as a third but it won’t be a high third rounder. NE was only able to get a 2nd for everyone’s darling Matt Cassel because once he is franchised he is guaranteed to make about 12 million bucks. So you would have to guarantee him about 20 just to make it worth his while to sign. Any less and he can just take the 12 and get 12 more (or more) the next year

By: nerd

nerd — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:51:59 +0000

Oh yeah, the Packers have a ton of LBs. Poppinga would probably replace Kampman. Personally, I’d stick Bishop out there, see what he could do. Bishop needs to see the field.
There’s also Jeremy Thompson. We’ve got guys who can play the position.

By: nerd

nerd — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 16:50:44 +0000

They can get production out of Kampy for this season, but they can’t get it out of their current offensive line. That’s the problem.
The Packers need to solidify that offensive line. It is truly offensive.
Last year the Packers held onto Kabeer Gbaja Biamila too long. Dude couldn’t play anymore. Clifton is getting to that point.