Lee Evans

[Sisyphean Bills]

You really don't believe he could take over Marvin Harrison's role for Indy????

I was being sarcastic. If everything goes perfectly according to Buddy's plan, we're not going to be in a position to truly compete for 4 years. By that time, he's well on the downside of his career if not done. So, the answer to the question "Do you trade him for the future?" has an obvious answer.

 

Whether one wants to think he's such a dynamic tour de force player that he forces Bill Belichick to completely change his schemes to account for him or not.

[papazoid]

Lee represents GREAT VALUE at his current salary/talent....you keep him....he is the least of our problems.

[BillsVet]

Manning passed for over 4600 yards and led the league in passing! He threw 33 TD's.

 

Why on earth would the Colts give up a player or a pick for Evans?

 

This is nuts.

 

Why on Earth would Chris or Bill Polian give up anything for Z receiver? They find them in the middle rounds already who don't command large salaries. Reggie Wayne is their X.

 

Evans seems to have quit the past 2 seasons and it's probably because he's tired of being on a losing team that's at the beginning of another rebuild. I guess he can keep running those 9 routes.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Another pedestrian season has to cement the fact his most marketable days are behind As he is locked up a few more seasons and is still one of the top 3 WR's on the team and may only garner a 4th or 5th rounder at best, there is nothing to trade for. Two 1000 yd seasons out of 7 don't help, nor does his age w.r.t marketability. Meanwhile a bunch of top notch WR's will be on the market as FA's.

 

He may as well be a Bill till he falls off of the depth chart, his contract is up or he retires. Hey at least he has a good attitude.

Edited February 13, 2011 by over 20 years of fanhood

[Bufcomments]

Even though Evans numbers has dropped its not all his fault. He makes things easier for Roscoe and Stevie and still can run by DB's.

 

Trading away your best players makes you worse not better.

 

Lee did his part last year and that is all you can ask.

 

NO WAY you trade him, that crazy stupid.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Even though Evans numbers has dropped its not all his fault. He makes things easier for Roscoe and Stevie and still can run by DB's.

 

Trading away your best players makes you worse not better.

 

Lee did his part last year and that is all you can ask.

 

NO WAY you trade him, that crazy stupid.

Exactly, right. It's clearly better to keep an aging asset on a 4-12 team that (let's say) has trade value and who's career will be all but finished by the time the team is good, than it would be to trade him for a draft pick / younger player that could grow along with the rest of the team that is being molded. I mean it's not like in 4 years anybody might say, "we're not that far away, we just need a couple more players" or anything.

[Captain Hindsight]

We dont have another deep threat. Teams without deep threats suffer....

 

 

Captain Checkdown comes to mind when an offense cant stretch the field and at least have that threat. I think people underestimate the importance of a deep threat in todays NFL

[fansince88]

Anyone think there is a chance we could trade Lee for some draft picks? I know it will be tough to trade that salery but i think draft picks would be better for us then keeping Lee. What picks you think we could get if he got traded?

Leave him here. We have enough needs and dont need to need WR's

[Geno Smith's Arm]

Manning passed for over 4600 yards and led the league in passing! He threw 33 TD's.

 

Why on earth would the Colts give up a player or a pick for Evans?

 

This is nuts.

 

 

If you read what I wrote, you would see that I never mention what I thought the Colts or anyone else would trade for Evans. I posted that he would thrive with them, he would likely be happy to go there, and that they would like to have him. I think these are all true. I believe he is a good player that would do well there. I think people that want to get rid of him are being foolish, because the Bills won't likely get enough back in return.

[BillsFan74]

Anyone think there is a chance we could trade Lee for some draft picks? I know it will be tough to trade that salery but i think draft picks would be better for us then keeping Lee. What picks you think we could get if he got traded?

 

what about the Rams? They need a Vet WR, Not sure Lee could fetch pick 14 in return but it's a thought.

[Ghost of Rob Johnson]

what about the Rams? They need a Vet WR, Not sure Lee could fetch pick 14 in return but it's a thought.

The Bills would be lucky to fetch pick 114, let alone pick 14.

[jumbalaya]

If you read what I wrote, you would see that I never mention what I thought the Colts or anyone else would trade for Evans. I posted that he would thrive with them, he would likely be happy to go there, and that they would like to have him. I think these are all true. I believe he is a good player that would do well there. I think people that want to get rid of him are being foolish, because the Bills won't likely get enough back in return.

Lee would be the 5th wideout on the Colts so why would they give up a pick for him? They like players that go all out, Peyton demands it. We could not get a 5th for Lee because Lee quit three years ago. He took the money and ran for the bus. It is a ludicrous statement when people say he makes other players better or he opens things up for the other guys. He could help others IF he caught more than 3 balls a game, IF he blocked downfield better, IF he went over the middle to draw in the safeties, and IF he didn't drop so many critical balls. Blowing by a guy once a year doesn't cut it. He was very good once but he is done so put a fork in him. If we do trade him what do we need to get in return to replace what he brings? Let me think, a fast guy that catches three balls a game, drops key first downs and doesn't go over the middle! Not hard to replace is it. Chad Ochocinqjohnson is available. Another washed-up, "could of been a contender" player. Only difference is that Lee kept his mouth shut and Chad hasn't.

[Hplarrm]

Exactly, right. It's clearly better to keep an aging asset on a 4-12 team that (let's say) has trade value and who's career will be all but finished by the time the team is good, than it would be to trade him for a draft pick / younger player that could grow along with the rest of the team that is being molded. I mean it's not like in 4 years anybody might say, "we're not that far away, we just need a couple more players" or anything.

Yes anyone is tradeable for good compensation.

 

The problem with the ideas being tossed out in this thread is that draft picks in general are bad compensation for a vet who has shown in the "real" world of the NFL what he can do.

 

Is Lee Evans a stud level #1 WR?

 

Nope.

 

This is true for a range of reasons some of which have to do with Evans skillset as an athlete. He does not have the athleticism and desire which Eric Moulds had which made him clearly a #1 level WR and allowed him to often get the honor of winning the popularity contest known as the Pro Bowl.

 

Do not get me wrong, Evans has a great skill set featuring near world class speed and has shown good ability to run routes and even get the ball in traffic. It is no error or mistake that he is in the top three of all time for Bills in terms of catches, yards and TDs.

 

However, Evans, though excellent on paper simply has not been good enough to be an overwhelming weapon without a good consistent QB or without good route design by the OC maximizing basic patterns like crossing patterns and getting as close to getting a flag as possible without getting caught setting picks and doing marginally legal stuff to get separation.

 

He is very good (and his stats no matter how much fans choose to ignore them indicate this). However, there are few signs like repetitive Pro Bowl appearances that would lead one to conclude he is as good in reality as he is on paper.

 

Yet, what would be crazy stupid is trading him for even one high draft pick or anything folks are suggesting. Yes, good players have to come from somewhere and good players tend to get drafted. However, draft picks have a lot of value in Mel Kiper land, but in "real" life the draft is simply a crapshoot. The conventional wisdom for example is that a 1st round player should start during his 1st year or he is a bust.

 

This just is not true.

 

A little more than half of all 1st rounders are starters after the end of their first season, and this is actually with a heavy bias to the first ten picks who in general are the best of the crop and also go to bad teams, However, the glitz and bling and the from time to time exception like Nate Clements starts immediately.

 

Draft picks are simply over-valued.

 

The Bills should keep Evans unless some team foolishly offers a couple of great picks for him.

[stony]

Exactly, right. It's clearly better to keep an aging asset on a 4-12 team that (let's say) has trade value and who's career will be all but finished by the time the team is good, than it would be to trade him for a draft pick / younger player that could grow along with the rest of the team that is being molded. I mean it's not like in 4 years anybody might say, "we're not that far away, we just need a couple more players" or anything.

 

 

He is aging, but he's only 29yrs old. He's got 5 prime years left. Why rid ourselves of an asset that makes others around him better for a younger, unproven asset? Now that he's only on the book for 3mil, his numbers should surpass his price-tag. Not sure if your past was sarcasm or not. Ha!

[Sisyphean Bills]

Yes anyone is tradeable for good compensation.

 

The problem with the ideas being tossed out in this thread is that draft picks in general are bad compensation for a vet who has shown in the "real" world of the NFL what he can do.

 

Is Lee Evans a stud level #1 WR?

 

Nope.

 

This is true for a range of reasons some of which have to do with Evans skillset as an athlete. He does not have the athleticism and desire which Eric Moulds had which made him clearly a #1 level WR and allowed him to often get the honor of winning the popularity contest known as the Pro Bowl.

 

Do not get me wrong, Evans has a great skill set featuring near world class speed and has shown good ability to run routes and even get the ball in traffic. It is no error or mistake that he is in the top three of all time for Bills in terms of catches, yards and TDs.

 

However, Evans, though excellent on paper simply has not been good enough to be an overwhelming weapon without a good consistent QB or without good route design by the OC maximizing basic patterns like crossing patterns and getting as close to getting a flag as possible without getting caught setting picks and doing marginally legal stuff to get separation.

 

He is very good (and his stats no matter how much fans choose to ignore them indicate this). However, there are few signs like repetitive Pro Bowl appearances that would lead one to conclude he is as good in reality as he is on paper.

 

Yet, what would be crazy stupid is trading him for even one high draft pick or anything folks are suggesting. Yes, good players have to come from somewhere and good players tend to get drafted. However, draft picks have a lot of value in Mel Kiper land, but in "real" life the draft is simply a crapshoot. The conventional wisdom for example is that a 1st round player should start during his 1st year or he is a bust.

 

This just is not true.

 

A little more than half of all 1st rounders are starters after the end of their first season, and this is actually with a heavy bias to the first ten picks who in general are the best of the crop and also go to bad teams, However, the glitz and bling and the from time to time exception like Nate Clements starts immediately.

 

Draft picks are simply over-valued.

 

The Bills should keep Evans unless some team foolishly offers a couple of great picks for him.

Seriously, absolutes are ridiculous. He's very tradeable.

 

That doesn't mean he's a bad player. That doesn't mean he's a bad human being. That doesn't mean fans can't comprehend what he does on the football field. It means, he can be traded.

 

The Bills are going nowhere in the short term. If you don't believe me, then ask Ralph Wilson and Buddy Nix. They've flat out said so. They are pretty close to the situation and might know something about it.

 

Now as far as calling the trade of older players "foolish", I submit Bill Belichick's approach in New England. He does not keep around aging veterans out of a sense of obligation or paralysis of fear if he can get something for said player. Why is that? Because he can find and develop younger, cheaper talent and continuously reload his roster and reinvent his team to fit his talent. He's not veteran adverse necessarily, but he's shown more than once that he's quite willing to take a longer view and turn the page.

 

Do you really think Lee Evans is going to be running 9 routes all game long with 4.2 speed at age 34 and 35? I suppose he could be as blessed as James Lofton was, but then again, Lofton is a Hall of Famer for a reason.

 

And, yes, you keep him if you can't get anything but a box of tape for him. But, if that's all you can get for him ... well, that might tell you something too.

[Geno Smith's Arm]

Lee would be the 5th wideout on the Colts so why would they give up a pick for him? They like players that go all out, Peyton demands it. We could not get a 5th for Lee because Lee quit three years ago. He took the money and ran for the bus. It is a ludicrous statement when people say he makes other players better or he opens things up for the other guys. He could help others IF he caught more than 3 balls a game, IF he blocked downfield better, IF he went over the middle to draw in the safeties, and IF he didn't drop so many critical balls. Blowing by a guy once a year doesn't cut it. He was very good once but he is done so put a fork in him. If we do trade him what do we need to get in return to replace what he brings? Let me think, a fast guy that catches three balls a game, drops key first downs and doesn't go over the middle! Not hard to replace is it. Chad Ochocinqjohnson is available. Another washed-up, "could of been a contender" player. Only difference is that Lee kept his mouth shut and Chad hasn't.

 

You obviously hate Lee Evans.

I didn't suggest that the Colts WOULD give a pick, a pepper, or a effin pie for Evans. I did suggest though, that he would play well for the Colts, would be glad to go there, and that they would be happy to have him. You can feel however you want about him (you could say "Evans would be the #2 guy on the Miami Dolphins practice squad"), but I think he would do well on a team like the Colts.

 

I

[Hplarrm]

Seriously, absolutes are ridiculous. He's very tradeable.

 

That doesn't mean he's a bad player. That doesn't mean he's a bad human being. That doesn't mean fans can't comprehend what he does on the football field. It means, he can be traded.

 

The Bills are going nowhere in the short term. If you don't believe me, then ask Ralph Wilson and Buddy Nix. They've flat out said so. They are pretty close to the situation and might know something about it.

 

Now as far as calling the trade of older players "foolish", I submit Bill Belichick's approach in New England. He does not keep around aging veterans out of a sense of obligation or paralysis of fear if he can get something for said player. Why is that? Because he can find and develop younger, cheaper talent and continuously reload his roster and reinvent his team to fit his talent. He's not veteran adverse necessarily, but he's shown more than once that he's quite willing to take a longer view and turn the page.

 

Do you really think Lee Evans is going to be running 9 routes all game long with 4.2 speed at age 34 and 35? I suppose he could be as blessed as James Lofton was, but then again, Lofton is a Hall of Famer for a reason.

 

And, yes, you keep him if you can't get anything but a box of tape for him. But, if that's all you can get for him ... well, that might tell you something too.

 

Sure trade him if someone offers you reasonable compensation, The thing which I fine fairly silly is that many posters seem to not realize that draft picks are pretty much a box of tape.

 

There is about a only a little bit better than a 50/50 chance that even a first round pick is going to be a disappointment from the Lee Evans great on paper level to the Joey Harrington/Mike Williams true bust level. These last two are good examples as its true that even with the heavy bias toward the top 10 picks being starters at the end of their first year, the conventional wisdom despite the facts is that a first round pick should start his first year.

 

Its a great thing when a 1st round pick like a Clements does start and contribute his rookie year, but the idea of trading Evans for a draft pick (some folks seem to feel he might only be worth a 3rd or later rounder because they are pissed at him) do not seem to understand that back in reality if you trade Evans for a draft pick unless you want to insist we would get a top 10 pick for him you more chances than not are trading him for a box of tape.

 

Who knows maybe the late pick you get for him turns out to be Boldin or Evans running buddy for the Bills the Joker.

 

However it does seem silly to me that the calls to trade him for even multiple draft picks because he is disappointing merely puts the decision back in the hands of Mr. Ralph who put together the same draft gurus that chose Evans.

 

The internal inconsistencies here are that if one judges Evans to be of such value that he can command a trade for great draft picks then why trade a player of such great value. If on the other hand, the advocate judges him to be of little value, then how are we gonna get more than a box of tape for him. In addition after the Mr. Ralph employing Modrak and the crew he hired missed so badly on Evans but now are gonna hit a homerun on whatever we get for him.

 

Trading him simply needs a lot more explanation about what one expects to happen that benefits the Bills to be a credible idea,

[Sisyphean Bills]

Sure trade him if someone offers you reasonable compensation, The thing which I fine fairly silly is that many posters seem to not realize that draft picks are pretty much a box of tape.

 

There is about a only a little bit better than a 50/50 chance that even a first round pick is going to be a disappointment from the Lee Evans great on paper level to the Joey Harrington/Mike Williams true bust level. These last two are good examples as its true that even with the heavy bias toward the top 10 picks being starters at the end of their first year, the conventional wisdom despite the facts is that a first round pick should start his first year.

 

Its a great thing when a 1st round pick like a Clements does start and contribute his rookie year, but the idea of trading Evans for a draft pick (some folks seem to feel he might only be worth a 3rd or later rounder because they are pissed at him) do not seem to understand that back in reality if you trade Evans for a draft pick unless you want to insist we would get a top 10 pick for him you more chances than not are trading him for a box of tape.

 

Who knows maybe the late pick you get for him turns out to be Boldin or Evans running buddy for the Bills the Joker.

 

However it does seem silly to me that the calls to trade him for even multiple draft picks because he is disappointing merely puts the decision back in the hands of Mr. Ralph who put together the same draft gurus that chose Evans.

 

The internal inconsistencies here are that if one judges Evans to be of such value that he can command a trade for great draft picks then why trade a player of such great value. If on the other hand, the advocate judges him to be of little value, then how are we gonna get more than a box of tape for him. In addition after the Mr. Ralph employing Modrak and the crew he hired missed so badly on Evans but now are gonna hit a homerun on whatever we get for him.

 

Trading him simply needs a lot more explanation about what one expects to happen that benefits the Bills to be a credible idea,

Maybe the issue is that some aren't truly confident in the draft genius of Nix and Modrak?

 

It is inarguable that not every draft pick is going to be a great player, but how impossible is it to find players that can even contribute at a pedestrian so-so level to a team that the owner has declared "has no talent"?

 

Another example: Packers trade

[Hplarrm]

Maybe the issue is that some aren't truly confident in the draft genius of Nix and Modrak?

 

It is inarguable that not every draft pick is going to be a great player, but how impossible is it to find players that can even contribute at a pedestrian so-so level to a team that the owner has declared "has no talent"?

 

Another example: Packers trade

The info and perspective you provide actually supports the point I am making IMHO.

 

Yep, the Packer trade does represent how one hopes things work out in this crapshoot of draft choices for older players who want to go (Favre clearly was done with the Packers as they had identified Aaron Rogers as the future and in fact immediate present) and their replacement is already on the roster (which is not the case in Evans case as even if Evans is not the #1 WR any fan hoped for the Joker is great but with plays like his drop of a gimme game winner in the endzone last year he also is not the #1 and even if he was part of Evans problem has been an aging Peerless is the best we have been able to do until recently for an essential #2-

 

Jerry Rice for example is the best WR ever bar none, but does one really want to claim that Dwight Clark was not an essential part of the 49er legacy. So too if the Bills let Evans go they virtually immediately have to find a replacement who is a proven at least #2 WR and the crapshoot of the draft is their best bet under your scenario.

 

Could they find the WR equivalent of Clay Matthews in the draft? Maybe, but pretty doubtful if one dubs the Bills braintrust a failure at drafting such that you are willing to discard Evans who is among the best they have done in the draft recently.

 

Again, the internal inconsistency of trading the "aging" Evans for draft pick (s) rears its ugly head. Flat out do you judge Evans production levels for the Bills as the 3rd best producer at WR of yards, catches, and TDs to be at a "pedestrian so-so level"?

 

Has Evans been the #1 we wanted?

 

No.

 

Is Evans overpaid?

 

Yep (but in the real picture all NFL players are overpaid to earn a glorious living playing a boys game and in the relative picture he got what the market required to keep him when he hit FA and any attempt to simply trade him for disappointing will not win the Bills back the bonus paid him).

 

The bottomline IMHO is that even though the Bills would recoup his annual salary that it is simply a crapshoot where we would have to pay at least this much to maybe replace him. Sure, if someone will give us a top ten pick for Evans you take it. However, even though it worked out perfectly for the Pack with Rodgers on the roster and Matthews being acquired. The Bills do not have a Rogers level #1 WR on their roster and it seems a step back to match your step forward at best to find a #2 WR as would be essential for us to do if we trade Evans.

 

At 29 is the "aging" Evans done?

 

In the injury filled world of the NFL everyone can be Kevin Everett tomorrow. However, his past performance and age points to him being at least at a pedestrian so-so level for a few years to come.

 

Maybe we could get a 3rd for Evans, but given the likelihood that this pick is more likely to be at the inadequate levels of a round choice of a Josh Reed rather than a Clay Matthews (unless you have more confidence in the Bills draft ability than I do) my sense is that trading him gives us a box of tape.

[John from Riverside]

I assume that the op brings this up possibly thinking we take Green witht the 3rd overall pick.......

 

Just go defense in this draft hard.....we are hurting so bad on that side of the ball. We appear to have found some unpolished gems in the later rounds at wide receiver so we are fortunate there......

 

I am excited to see what Eisley can do as well.