Jump to content

If you could trade Lee Evans for a Starter

wardigital

By wardigital
in The Stadium Wall Archives

 Share

Recommended Posts

wardigital Rookie

wardigital

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm not talking draft picks. For the sake of this scenario, let's say that it is March 2011, and you have just been given the GM role as the Bills. Your first order of business is to trade Lee Evans. Ralph Wilson has demanded it, and you must do it or be punished with death, or whatever the hell sort of punishment would make you do it.

 

The draft has exploded. There is no such thing as a draft. You must trade Evans for a positional player in the NFL who could start on our team (this means lots of backups). What position do you go with?

 

I would probably go with LB. I feel like LB is obviously a problem right now, but not one that we necessarily want to deal with in the draft with T and QB in such awful shape.

 

What happens if we trade Evans at the WR position? Well, it's a virtual no-man's land.

 

But with Edwards being gone and Evans being relatively quiet about his departure, with his recent frustration about getting the ball, and with the quiet rumblings that he may, at some point, demand a trade this year, I think that it is at least plausible to suggest that the Bills would try to use Evans as one of their lone pieces of leverage to improve elsewhere. A team like Washington may be willing to take him instead of trying to get someone out of the draft, you never know.

Edited by wardigital
Pete Hall of Famer

Pete

Posted
Posted (edited)

I am so sick of hearing "trade Lee Evans". That idea is simply retarded IMO. It makes sense to trade Marshawn for the right price because we are deep at RB. But if we trade Lee- one of the only Bills that could start on most any NFL team- that leaves us with gaping holes at WR. Who becomes #1- Roscoe? WTF kind of logic is that? Then we need to devote another high pick trying to obtain a #1 WR when we could be addressing needs at OLB, ILB, Dline, OT, QB, WR, C etc. This team would be so much better if they held onto their talent (Pat Williams, Antoine Winfield, London Fletcher, Etc) then letting them walk and try and replace on the cheap. This team has many holes and can ill afford to start digging others

Edited by Pete
The Dean Hall of Famer

The Dean

Posted
Posted

Evans is one of the players the Bills can least afford to lose, as there is no other legit #1 WR on the team (some question if there is a #2 WR on the team). The claim that Lee is not a legit #1 is moronic, so let's leave that discussion to the brain-dead.

 

But if you had to trade Lee for a player, it would have to be a quality QB, LT or LB.

 

I guess this was strictly an academic exercise, right?

Peter All Pro

Peter

Posted
Posted

Lee Evans simply is not as good as some think he is. He is very good at running go patterns. Beyond that, I see a guy who does not go over the middle, he does not aggressively come back for balls when the QB is in trouble, and he does not fight for the ball.

 

The top receivers in the league do not get taken out of games as easily as he does. Maybe I am spoiled, but when I compare him to someone like Andre Reed or Eric Moulds for example, there really is no comparison. He got his wish now that his buddy's nemesis is off the team. It is time for him to step up and show everyone that he is one of the top WRs in the league and deserving of all of the money that the Bills are paying him.

 

Evans is one of the players the Bills can least afford to lose, as there is no other legit #1 WR on the team (some question if there is a #2 WR on the team). The claim that Lee is not a legit #1 is moronic, so let's leave that discussion to the brain-dead.

 

But if you had to trade Lee for a player, it would have to be a quality QB, LT or LB.

 

I guess this was strictly an academic exercise, right?

The Guy Practice Squad

The Guy

Posted
Posted

I'm not talking draft picks. For the sake of this scenario, let's say that it is March 2011, and you have just been given the GM role as the Bills. Your first order of business is to trade Lee Evans. Ralph Wilson has demanded it, and you must do it or be punished with death, or whatever the hell sort of punishment would make you do it.

 

The draft has exploded. There is no such thing as a draft. You must trade Evans for a positional player in the NFL who could start on our team (this means lots of backups). What position do you go with?

 

I would probably go with LB. I feel like LB is obviously a problem right now, but not one that we necessarily want to deal with in the draft with T and QB in such awful shape.

 

What happens if we trade Evans at the WR position? Well, it's a virtual no-man's land.

 

But with Edwards being gone and Evans being relatively quiet about his departure, with his recent frustration about getting the ball, and with the quiet rumblings that he may, at some point, demand a trade this year, I think that it is at least plausible to suggest that the Bills would try to use Evans as one of their lone pieces of leverage to improve elsewhere. A team like Washington may be willing to take him instead of trying to get someone out of the draft, you never know.

 

For what its worth Lee does demand double coverage. That in itself is useful to the offense.

JPS Veteran

JPS

Posted
Posted

I am so sick of hearing "trade Lee Evans". That idea is simply retarded IMO. It makes sense to trade Marshawn for the right price because we are deep at RB. But if we trade Lee- one of the only Bills that could start on most any NFL team- that leaves us with gaping holes at WR. Who becomes #1- Roscoe? WTF kind of logic is that? Then we need to devote another high pick trying to obtain a #1 WR when we could be addressing needs at OLB, ILB, Dline, OT, QB, WR, C etc. This team would be so much better if they held onto their talent (Pat Williams, Antoine Winfield, London Fletcher, Etc) then letting them walk and try and replace on the cheap. This team has many holes and can ill afford to start digging others

Thank you for the sanity

Gotta Dream RFA

Gotta Dream

Posted
Posted

I'd trade him just because he deserves better. He's always been a team player on a team that quite simply SUCKS! If you love somebody, set him free....

Sisyphean Bills All Pro

Sisyphean Bills

Posted
Posted

I'd trade him for any of the big 3 positions (QB, OT, DE) in a heartbeat. (I'm assuming trading for a similar quality player and not someone's trash at a position.) How many games has he dominated, carrying the team, and won in his seasons with the Bills? The truth is that productive WRs can be found, but a WR has no value if you don't have the offensive capability to throw the football.

wardigital Rookie

wardigital

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Can I somehow trade him for a good quarterback in this new, made-up fantasy land? Because if so, that's the easy and obvious answer.

 

If you feel that, that is what you can get for him, sure. I don't think anyone would trade you a good quarterback for Lee Evans, even in this made-up fantasy land.

 

Oh, and I don't see why it is necessary to be so pithy. I'm just trying to contribute something to the board.

 

I am so sick of hearing "trade Lee Evans". That idea is simply retarded IMO. It makes sense to trade Marshawn for the right price because we are deep at RB. But if we trade Lee- one of the only Bills that could start on most any NFL team- that leaves us with gaping holes at WR. Who becomes #1- Roscoe? WTF kind of logic is that? Then we need to devote another high pick trying to obtain a #1 WR when we could be addressing needs at OLB, ILB, Dline, OT, QB, WR, C etc. This team would be so much better if they held onto their talent (Pat Williams, Antoine Winfield, London Fletcher, Etc) then letting them walk and try and replace on the cheap. This team has many holes and can ill afford to start digging others

 

What if Evans demands a trade? Or what if it is possible that Lee Evans is not as good as you think he is? I totally disagree with the assertion that he could start on most any NFL team.

 

Evans is one of the players the Bills can least afford to lose, as there is no other legit #1 WR on the team (some question if there is a #2 WR on the team). The claim that Lee is not a legit #1 is moronic, so let's leave that discussion to the brain-dead.

 

But if you had to trade Lee for a player, it would have to be a quality QB, LT or LB.

 

I guess this was strictly an academic exercise, right?

 

It's not moronic, it's perfectly reasonable. A player whose high water mark was an 18-month period of which he hasn't even remotely come close to replicating since sounds a lot like Trent Edwards. It also sounds a lot like Lee Evans, who has been stone-cold-ordinary since.

 

And yes, it was strictly an academic exercise? Isn't that the role of discussion boards, on occasion?

 

For what its worth Lee does demand double coverage. That in itself is useful to the offense.

 

He does sometimes. But not exactly always. And when we had a legitimate second receiver threat last year in T.O, that double coverage did not result in particularly productive years for either Evans or Owens.

Edited by wardigital
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...