What do you think of the outcome of the Peters trade?

[PromoTheRobot]

MID LEVEL.....ROFLOL. When we people finally remember that he is a two time probowler and people are elected to the probowl in LARGE part due to their actual peers the players, the coaches who have to game plan against them and scouts with a bit of fan vote thrown in there as an after thought?

 

Let me guess your another one of these guys that thinks their armchair talent opinion is correct and the actual professionals that get paid MILLIONS are actually wrong. Can't wait to see what team hires you as the next GM. "

 

Superbowl here we come!!!!"

 

I asked this of the Senator I think and I am still looking for someone with the stones to answer. WHY DO PEOPLE THINK WOOD IS A GUARANTEED STUD AND WE GOT THE BETTER OF THE TRADE!?!?!?!??

 

Seriously. He and Levire were thrust into starting roles on a line that cleared house. He plays RG on a terrible.....repeat TERRIBLE o-line? Other than occasionally pushing a defender to the ground and wrestling with him instead of picking up another defender to block at taking care of his primary blocking assignment what has he done to earn his STUD title? Our line is BAAAAAAADDDD!! What has he been doing to keep Trent or Fitz upright? What has he done to open holes on his side of the line in the running game?

 

Before you go calling someone a STUD please look at their ACTUAL PLAY!!!!!

 

Ha ha ha ha!! You should actually practice what you preach with Peters. He is stealing money from the Eagles.

 

PTR

[Cynical]

I am not saying this trade is a win for Buffalo at all. BUT its looking pretty good for us so far I mean Wood looks like he is going to be a good guard for a long time if not a pro-bowl caliber guy.

 

You do realize if the Bills did not trade Peters, there would have been no need to draft a RG?

And we still do not for certain if Butler is a viable RT.

 

As for Nelson he has potential to be a good player and was a good value in the draft at the time.

 

And if I continue to play the lotto with the same numbers over and over again, I have the potential to win some nice coin.

And it only costs $1 to play!

 

Now look at Peters the guy has played horrid at times this season and he continues to struggle with injuries for the third year in a row.

 

Whoopie! Is he still playing? Lets look at how well his replacement is doing on the Bills:

 

Plan A, Walker, was doing so well they cut his ass before the regular season started. Plan B, Tinker Bell, is doing so well he was THE most penalized OL in the league, and is considered the WORST OT in the entire league.

Dead freaking last.

Good thing he's not hurt. Oh wait, he is. In fact, he's gone for the season.

 

You also have to look at how much he is being paid I mean 10 million for mid level LT production or a good young guard and a young tight end with potential? To me its looking good for Buffalo.

 

Is Peters overpaid? Yep, no doubt.

But that overpaid, lazy, fat ass, slob, mid level producing LT is still playing and producing at a level MUCH HIGHER than any attempt the Bills have tried to replace him.

 

Please stop comparing the RG position to the LT position especially when the Bills initially did not need a RG, and still have no LT.

[PDaDdy]

Ha ha ha ha!! You should actually practice what you preach with Peters. He is stealing money from the Eagles.

 

PTR

 

 

Well thanks again for your unsubstantiated opinion of why the Eagles were GLAD to shell out that kind of money for an elite LT. Now how about commenting on those thoughts about Wood and his "studhood!" Oh....ya...nothing to say.....no proof of his inevitable probowl appearances, studliness, ability to raise the level of play of people around him, accolades by the media and pundits?

 

Wood COULD POSSIBLY be good but right now he has shown ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that could possibly give anyone any basis to say that we made out on the trade with Philly for Peters. How about we wait 2 or 3 years to see what he actually turns out to be. I have hopes for Wood and wish the best for him but it's people's blind hate of Peters that makes them say we made out on the trade. Trading in a pro bowl LT for an unknown unproven commodity is hardly a great deal. WE could just as easily be saying in 2 years that Wood is a bust for all we know.

[Flbillsfan#1]

You do realize if the Bills did not trade Peters, there would have been no need to draft a RG?

And we still do not for certain if Butler is a viable RT.

 

 

 

And if I continue to play the lotto with the same numbers over and over again, I have the potential to win some nice coin.

And it only costs $1 to play!

 

 

 

Whoopie! Is he still playing? Lets look at how well his replacement is doing on the Bills:

 

Plan A, Walker, was doing so well they cut his ass before the regular season started. Plan B, Tinker Bell, is doing so well he was THE most penalized OL in the league, and is considered the WORST OT in the entire league.

Dead freaking last.

Good thing he's not hurt. Oh wait, he is. In fact, he's gone for the season.

 

 

 

Is Peters overpaid? Yep, no doubt.

But that overpaid, lazy, fat ass, slob, mid level producing LT is still playing and producing at a level MUCH HIGHER than any attempt the Bills have tried to replace him.

 

Please stop comparing the RG position to the LT position especially when the Bills initially did not need a RG, and still have no LT.

The Bills traded Peters for DRAFT PICKS not a RG. Wood is one pick they used & while playing RG now he is the future Center of the Bills.

[Orton's Arm]

You do realize if the Bills did not trade Peters, there would have been no need to draft a RG?

And we still do not for certain if Butler is a viable RT.

If I understand your argument correctly, you are attributing the movement of Walker to the LT position, and his subsequent release from the roster, as part of the Peters trade. Meaning, that if the Peters trade didn't happen, Butler stays at RG, Walker at RT, Peters at LT; so our only OL needs are at LG and C. Drafting Levitre and signing Hangartner would have filled those two needs.

 

The initial trading away of Peters opened up a hole at the RG spot, because Butler had been moved from RG to RT, and Walker from RT to LT. Then when Walker didn't work out at LT, there was a hole there too.

 

Your argument hinges on the fact that Langston Walker was considered a somewhat useful member of the Bills' OL before the Peters trade, and was released due to its aftermath. It's the release of Langston Walker that opened up the additional hole you've described.

 

I'll agree that over the short-term, that additional hole on the offensive line really hurt us. For some (i.e., Bills quarterbacks) the pain was not just metaphorical.

 

But long-term, are guys like Langston Walker really the kinds of players around which you want to build your football team? Overpaid, overweight, slow, underachieving, . . .

 

The Bills will probably need to use their first round pick in the 2010 draft on a LT. But assuming the LT they pick works out well, he'll be an upgrade over Peters. Plus they'll have upgraded the RT spot (Butler over Walker) and, possibly, their RG spot (Wood over Butler). These upgrades are partially self-funded. By that I mean that the team traded away an offensive lineman to get a first round pick which it put right back into the offensive line. That part of it's a wash. The net cost to the team for the upgrades, in terms of draft picks, will be the first round LT we'll hopefully be seeing in 2010. Are the three upgrades I've described worth that net cost? I believe they will be, but my opinion is contingent on how well the players actually play.

[sharper802]

Wood is a god dam guard. As in can find them anywhere. Peters is a ProBowl LT. As in they are hard to find. Now throw in the fact that the Bills will draft a LT in the top 7 picks and likely pay more for that pick having never played a down in the NFL than they would have if they just paid Peters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MRW]

But long-term, are guys like Langston Walker really the kinds of players around which you want to build your football team? Overpaid, overweight, slow, underachieving, . . .

 

The Bills will probably need to use their first round pick in the 2010 draft on a LT. But assuming the LT they pick works out well, he'll be an upgrade over Peters. Plus they'll have upgraded the RT spot (Butler over Walker) and, possibly, their RG spot (Wood over Butler). These upgrades are partially self-funded. By that I mean that the team traded away an offensive lineman to get a first round pick which it put right back into the offensive line. That part of it's a wash. The net cost to the team for the upgrades, in terms of draft picks, will be the first round LT we'll hopefully be seeing in 2010. Are the three upgrades I've described worth that net cost? I believe they will be, but my opinion is contingent on how well the players actually play.

I'll buy Butler as an upgrade over Walker when he actually makes it through a complete season. He was playing well before his injury, but is he going to stay healthy?

 

You raise some points worth considering, but I think you discount the short-term too much. The Bills may have a grand plan for the OL that really comes together in a couple of years, but I don't think it was necessary to completely blow it up to get there. The moves they made not only destroyed any continuity on the line and jettisoned its best player, they also decimated the depth on the line. Once Butler got hurt, this already young line was a complete trainwreck. Say what you will about Walker, keeping him around would have given the team options to deal with the injuries.

[Orton's Arm]

I'll buy Butler as an upgrade over Walker when he actually makes it through a complete season. He was playing well before his injury, but is he going to stay healthy?

 

You raise some points worth considering, but I think you discount the short-term too much. The Bills may have a grand plan for the OL that really comes together in a couple of years, but I don't think it was necessary to completely blow it up to get there. The moves they made not only destroyed any continuity on the line and jettisoned its best player, they also decimated the depth on the line. Once Butler got hurt, this already young line was a complete trainwreck. Say what you will about Walker, keeping him around would have given the team options to deal with the injuries.

A solid post. I agree that until Butler proves he can stay healthy, any upgrade he can provide over Walker will remain hypothetical. Also, I admit to having a tendency to discount the short-term too much while looking at the long-term. And I admit that in this case, however well things work out in the long term, in the short run this "offensive line" is getting our quarterbacks killed. Even if Edwards' career would have failed anyway, even with a good line, I still think it's our responsibility to keep him out of a coma.

 

One last thing: calling Walker "our best lineman" isn't a compliment to him: it's a condemnation of the other four linemen's play. (Though I'd argue that that condemnation is unfair to Butler, either as a RG or a RT.)

[BADOLBILZ]

I like Wood's heart and passion too. But right now, he's below average. Still young, though, so he could easily develop and become an excellent player. But he's far from there yet. Far from it.

 

Yeah, I love hearing how great Eric Wood is. He's great because nothing is expected of him yet. The guy was BAD in the loss last week. If he plays only a bit better next season, fans will be on his asss because expectations will be much higher. I'm optimistic he will be good, but I haven't seen anything to make me think he is going to be in a Pro Bowl at any time. I mean, when Ruben Brown came into the NFL, he was an impact player right away. In his first game I remember him destroying Michael Dean Perry then a star DT with Denver. I haven't seen any of those kind of plays from Wood.

[BADOLBILZ]

A solid post. I agree that until Butler proves he can stay healthy, any upgrade he can provide over Walker will remain hypothetical. Also, I admit to having a tendency to discount the short-term too much while looking at the long-term. And I admit that in this case, however well things work out in the long term, in the short run this "offensive line" is getting our quarterbacks killed. Even if Edwards' career would have failed anyway, even with a good line, I still think it's our responsibility to keep him out of a coma.

 

One last thing: calling Walker "our best lineman" isn't a compliment to him: it's a condemnation of the other four linemen's play. (Though I'd argue that that condemnation is unfair to Butler, either as a RG or a RT.)

 

Butler was not a good RG. His run and pass blocking were both below average. How he somehow has become lamented as the missing piece at RT is beyond comprehension. Besides having some untimely situations where he was absolutely blown up in pass pro, his run blocking was poor. It's all moot anyway, you can't bank on a guy like that, his body just can't hold up to the game.

[bills_fan_in_raleigh]

take a vote away from trade I read it the wrong way. I like having the future of wood and nelson than that lazy asrse Peters and his attitude

[MRW]

A solid post. I agree that until Butler proves he can stay healthy, any upgrade he can provide over Walker will remain hypothetical. Also, I admit to having a tendency to discount the short-term too much while looking at the long-term. And I admit that in this case, however well things work out in the long term, in the short run this "offensive line" is getting our quarterbacks killed. Even if Edwards' career would have failed anyway, even with a good line, I still think it's our responsibility to keep him out of a coma.

 

One last thing: calling Walker "our best lineman" isn't a compliment to him: it's a condemnation of the other four linemen's play. (Though I'd argue that that condemnation is unfair to Butler, either as a RG or a RT.)

Sorry I was unclear, I meant "best lineman" to refer to Peters. Walker was definitely not the best player on the line, though he was better than Dockery and the one-two punch of Fowler and Preston.

 

As I hinted at earlier, I'd consider the jury out on whether Butler or Walker is better, because even if it were clear that Butler is a better player, it's moot if he can't stay on the field.

[Cynical]

If I understand your argument correctly, you are attributing the movement of Walker to the LT position, and his subsequent release from the roster, as part of the Peters trade. Meaning, that if the Peters trade didn't happen, Butler stays at RG, Walker at RT, Peters at LT; so our only OL needs are at LG and C. Drafting Levitre and signing Hangartner would have filled those two needs.

 

The initial trading away of Peters opened up a hole at the RG spot, because Butler had been moved from RG to RT, and Walker from RT to LT. Then when Walker didn't work out at LT, there was a hole there too.

 

Your argument hinges on the fact that Langston Walker was considered a somewhat useful member of the Bills' OL before the Peters trade, and was released due to its aftermath. It's the release of Langston Walker that opened up the additional hole you've described.

 

Yes, it does hinge on Walker being considered a useful member of the line. At least useful enough the Bills actually thought they could plug him in at LT, and solve that problem (at least in the short term).

 

I really hate to think switching Walker was some kind of ruse to eventually dump him, and that Tinker Bell really was the organization's Plan A @ LT. If so, the idiots that came up with that plan need to be shot.

 

I'll agree that over the short-term, that additional hole on the offensive line really hurt us. For some (i.e., Bills quarterbacks) the pain was not just metaphorical.

 

But long-term, are guys like Langston Walker really the kinds of players around which you want to build your football team? Overpaid, overweight, slow, underachieving, . . .

 

That depends. Did the Bills really need to upgrade the RT position? Walker was not the best RT, but he wasn't the worst either. If the Bills had left Walker @ RT, they could have focused on fixing issues with team that needed to be addressed now.

 

The Bills will probably need to use their first round pick in the 2010 draft on a LT. But assuming the LT they pick works out well, he'll be an upgrade over Peters. Plus they'll have upgraded the RT spot (Butler over Walker) and, possibly, their RG spot (Wood over Butler). These upgrades are partially self-funded. By that I mean that the team traded away an offensive lineman to get a first round pick which it put right back into the offensive line. That part of it's a wash.

 

Correct, with one caveat. The Bills used the acquired 1st RD pick on a RG instead of using it to acquire a LT.

And as you pointed out, the Bills will now probably have to spend one of their first round picks to acquire a LT.

 

Kind of like having your car totaled in an accident, the insurance company sends you the check, and then you using the money to buy a large screen HD TV. You got a sweet TV, but you still do not have a car.

 

The net cost to the team for the upgrades, in terms of draft picks, will be the first round LT we'll hopefully be seeing in 2010. Are the three upgrades I've described worth that net cost? I believe they will be, but my opinion is contingent on how well the players actually play.

 

That is the key. Any 'upgrade' in that chain that fails not only makes the trade a short term disaster, it also diminishes the long term benefit.

[Malazan]

There's a fallacy being argued in this thread. Too many are unhappy with the Bill's plan to replace Peters and rolling that into "we should have kept Peters". Separate the two and judge the situations differently. Two wrongs don't make a right so just focus on each wrong on its own.

 

I think the Buffalo News Article sums it up perfectly:

 

Peters up, down

 

Here's what we're hearing on how left tackle Jason Peters is playing in Philadelphia through nine games:

 

He has been inconsistent. The concerns some had about how he would react to getting the big contract seem well-founded. He hurt his knee earlier in the season and declined to go back in the game even though he appeared to be well enough to play. He hurt his ankle two weeks ago, then told the coaches in pregame warm-ups before last Sunday's game against the Chargers that it still was bothering him. He was deactivated. That doesn't play well in Philly, where former Eagles right tackle Jon Runyan once played an entire season with a fractured tailbone. By unofficial count he has given up three sacks. On the other hand, he was decent versus the Giants three weeks ago and played pretty well against Dallas two weeks ago. So the jury remains out.

 

I think this time, it won't be Peters who wants to end the contract early.