Lee Evans

[Chandler#81]

Trading Lee Evans would be the worst move this team good make, beyond OJ beyond Lynch, beyond letting Peerless go...

 

 

Juice was toast by the time Knox kicked him to the curb. One of the draft choices we got in the trade w/ SF (2nd) was used on Joe Cribbs. Atl overpaid for Price w/o a #1 to offset coverage and it's way too early to knock the Lynch trade.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/71107-oj-simpsons-years-as-a-49er

 

I don't think Evans should be traded, but it wouldn't be the worse thing in team history.

[BuffaloBillsMagic1]

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.

Did you see how many dropped passes the WRs on Indy had the last few games. Lee Evans would be a game breaker with Peyton like Marvin Harriosn was. Lee Evans can still play and with a team like Indy, they need WRs as Gonzalez and Clark , the WR TE guy are al;ways hurt at key times. m Lee Evans would be perfect with them.

[K-9]

Juice was toast by the time Knox kicked him to the curb. One of the draft choices we got in the trade w/ SF (2nd) was used on Joe Cribbs. Atl overpaid for Price w/o a #1 to offset coverage and it's way too early to knock the Lynch trade.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/71107-oj-simpsons-years-as-a-49er

 

I don't think Evans should be traded, but it wouldn't be the worse thing in team history.

 

Worst trade in Bills history? I know that you know that I know we both know what that trade is. All other bad trades are a distant second in terms of being the worst.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[jumbalaya]

Did you see how many dropped passes the WRs on Indy had the last few games. Lee Evans would be a game breaker with Peyton like Marvin Harriosn was. Lee Evans can still play and with a team like Indy, they need WRs as Gonzalez and Clark , the WR TE guy are al;ways hurt at key times. m Lee Evans would be perfect with them.

You are smoking crack. Lee is not a game breaker and he is no Marvin Harrison. All of the Lee defenders said wait and watch Lee once he has TO opposite him. All Lee did was stand around and watch TO. Lee did nothing. Then everyone said he didn't have a #1 QB, well Fitz turned into a #1 QB and Lee stood around and watched Johnson. Again Lee did nothing. Now you think that by teaming him with Peyton he will become the next Marvin Harrison. You are very very naive. Lee has no guts. Do you think Marvin in his prime would have three catches per game with Fitz throwing to him? I don't, and it is because Marvin has ability and desire. Lee had ability but he has no desire, now I am not sure he even has ability.

[BuffaloBillsMagic1]

You are smoking crack. Lee is not a game breaker and he is no Marvin Harrison. All of the Lee defenders said wait and watch Lee once he has TO opposite him. All Lee did was stand around and watch TO. Lee did nothing. Then everyone said he didn't have a #1 QB, well Fitz turned into a #1 QB and Lee stood around and watched Johnson. Again Lee did nothing. Now you think that by teaming him with Peyton he will become the next Marvin Harrison. You are very very naive. Lee has no guts. Do you think Marvin in his prime would have three catches per game with Fitz throwing to him? I don't, and it is because Marvin has ability and desire. Lee had ability but he has no desire, now I am not sure he even has ability.

You are so wrong it is unbelievable youare a Bills fan. Lee Evans would shine in the right situation as he has in the past. He did not get old or slow at his age. He is at the top of his physical ability. It's one thing tio hate a guy, but give him some credit for what he has done and can do.,

[Chandler#81]

Worst trade in Bills history? I know that you know that I know we both know what that trade is. All other bad trades are a distant second in terms of being the worst.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

 

But, but..Flores won 2 Super Bowls!!

 

And that Powell guy? Freakin' Awesome!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Powell

 

On paper, it was a swap of back-up QB's and fading WR's.. No big deal...

[billsfreak]

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?

I don't think they will or should trade him, but if they wanted to and couldn't, it wouldn't be because of the salary, he is only due something like 3.5 million or so this year, which isn't that much for a #2 receiver, much less a #1.

Edited February 15, 2011 by billsfreak

[Sisyphean Bills]

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

 

You have a point?

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-

 

The point is that the Packers had cajones. Those fools dared to be successful and took a risk. They moved on from the biggest star on their team because it was time to do so. There was no guarantee that Rodgers would even be mediocre 3 years ago, let alone win a Super Bowl. It is the perfect example of the point I made because if they had stuck with Favre, Rodgers would still not have much experience and Favre's diminishing skills (watch the tape of some of his 2010 games; he was horrible) would have destroyed any chance that the 2010 team, the team that won the Super Bowl, would have had. Instead, they turned the page and decided to mold a new, younger team. Dumping Favre on the Jets led to them being able to get Matthews, who is a young star on their team. It gave them more pieces to the puzzle and it paid of beautifully. (BTW, if you think Lee Evans has a bigger role as far as the Bills "success" than Brett Favre did with the Packers, you're nuts.)

 

How does any of that proves that the draft is a "crap shoot"? Actually, the insistence on calling the draft a total roll of the dice and that a draft pick has as much value as a box of tape is sort of humorous. If you have a good scouting department, those draft picks will more often than not translate into good players. In fact, if the draft were completely random as you've said over and over, then the notion that a team should, or even can, build through the draft becomes a meaningless expression of toiling in futility and waiting for the deux ex machina to build a good football team.

 

My point simply comes down to this. Building a championship caliber team is about building a team with all the right components at the right time so that the entire team can be successful together. It isn't really that hard to understand.

 

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.

 

Wow. Completely irrelevant.

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.

Oh, now I own a scenario? You are too generous. I don't own the concept. It's a tried and proven approach to building a team that many new regimes use. Trade the assets you have for the assets you want. Trades happen.

 

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.

I'll take that as an admission on your part that you don't have total confidence in Nix and Modrak.

 

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"?

 

Well, you've conflated two separate concepts into a big pile of mud.

 

1) Lee Evans is an aging speed receiver that can be traded since the Bills are not poised to win a championship in the next 1 or 2 years anyway.

 

2) Your convoluted suggestion that you don't really trust the Bills front office and scouting to rebuild the team correctly anyway as evidenced by the insistence of calling draft picks nothing more than a box of tape and a roll of the dice. It is this second point as to which I asked exactly how hard it was to find an average football player that can contribute to a team with no talent.

 

You see, two different points entirely. Neither point even suggests Lee Evans is a so-so player or anything remotely akin to such nonsense. Thus, the internal inconsistency is in your own head.

 

Let's present the question again. How hard is it to find an average player in the draft when your team is talentless? We're discussing drafting players. Your rambling prose suggests that draft picks are worthless boxes of tape. Now, my question, though ignored, was and is directly plumbing your faith in the Bills front office and scouting. They have said themselves that their roster is full of bad players. That means that even an average (a "so-so") player is an upgrade, you see. So, all they have to do is find some average players to upgrade from bad. If they can't even do that, then you are indeed correct and draft picks are a waste of time. We'll never see another average player, let alone a good player, so we should by all means hang onto whatever players we have until the bitter end. On the other hand, by definition at least 50% of the NFL is populated by average or better players. That's roughly 1000 players. So, how hard is it really to find a player in the draft that can become one of the top 1000 players in the NFL in say 3 or 4 seasons?

 

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.

More red herring nonsense. I never said it was "essential" to trade Evans, and I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth. Speculation that Lee Evans could not be replaced by someone cheaper and younger is ridiculous. The Steelers dumped Santonio Holmes and it didn't ruin their team. The Patriots got rid of their deep threat and their offense actually got better. The assumption that it is a good idea to cling to yesterday's hero rather than take a chance and try to make a better team in 3 or 4 years down the road is understood. I simply don't agree that it is either the absolute "only move" nor even the best move.

 

How does anyone even know what someone will offer for Evans if their stance is that they can't possibly make any deals involving him because, by damn, we might do worse than 4-12 next year without him? If one can't even hold the thought in their head, they can't possibly consider it from different perspectives.

 

PS: The truth is the Bills might just be worse than 4-12 with Evans.

[RealityCheck]

You have a point?

 

 

The point is that the Packers had cajones. Those fools dared to be successful and took a risk. They moved on from the biggest star on their team because it was time to do so. There was no guarantee that Rodgers would even be mediocre 3 years ago, let alone win a Super Bowl. It is the perfect example of the point I made because if they had stuck with Favre, Rodgers would still not have much experience and Favre's diminishing skills (watch the tape of some of his 2010 games; he was horrible) would have destroyed any chance that the 2010 team, the team that won the Super Bowl, would have had. Instead, they turned the page and decided to mold a new, younger team. Dumping Favre on the Jets led to them being able to get Matthews, who is a young star on their team. It gave them more pieces to the puzzle and it paid of beautifully. (BTW, if you think Lee Evans has a bigger role as far as the Bills "success" than Brett Favre did with the Packers, you're nuts.)

 

How does any of that proves that the draft is a "crap shoot"? Actually, the insistence on calling the draft a total roll of the dice and that a draft pick has as much value as a box of tape is sort of humorous. If you have a good scouting department, those draft picks will more often than not translate into good players. In fact, if the draft were completely random as you've said over and over, then the notion that a team should, or even can, build through the draft becomes a meaningless expression of toiling in futility and waiting for the deux ex machina to build a good football team.

 

My point simply comes down to this. Building a championship caliber team is about building a team with all the right components at the right time so that the entire team can be successful together. It isn't really that hard to understand.

 

 

 

Wow. Completely irrelevant.

 

Oh, now I own a scenario? You are too generous. I don't own the concept. It's a tried and proven approach to building a team that many new regimes use. Trade the assets you have for the assets you want. Trades happen.

 

 

I'll take that as an admission on your part that you don't have total confidence in Nix and Modrak.

 

 

 

Well, you've conflated two separate concepts into a big pile of mud.

 

1) Lee Evans is an aging speed receiver that can be traded since the Bills are not poised to win a championship in the next 1 or 2 years anyway.

 

2) Your convoluted suggestion that you don't really trust the Bills front office and scouting to rebuild the team correctly anyway as evidenced by the insistence of calling draft picks nothing more than a box of tape and a roll of the dice. It is this second point as to which I asked exactly how hard it was to find an average football player that can contribute to a team with no talent.

 

You see, two different points entirely. Neither point even suggests Lee Evans is a so-so player or anything remotely akin to such nonsense. Thus, the internal inconsistency is in your own head.

 

Let's present the question again. How hard is it to find an average player in the draft when your team is talentless? We're discussing drafting players. Your rambling prose suggests that draft picks are worthless boxes of tape. Now, my question, though ignored, was and is directly plumbing your faith in the Bills front office and scouting. They have said themselves that their roster is full of bad players. That means that even an average (a "so-so") player is an upgrade, you see. So, all they have to do is find some average players to upgrade from bad. If they can't even do that, then you are indeed correct and draft picks are a waste of time. We'll never see another average player, let alone a good player, so we should by all means hang onto whatever players we have until the bitter end. On the other hand, by definition at least 50% of the NFL is populated by average or better players. That's roughly 1000 players. So, how hard is it really to find a player in the draft that can become one of the top 1000 players in the NFL in say 3 or 4 seasons?

 

 

More red herring nonsense. I never said it was "essential" to trade Evans, and I don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth. Speculation that Lee Evans could not be replaced by someone cheaper and younger is ridiculous. The Steelers dumped Santonio Holmes and it didn't ruin their team. The Patriots got rid of their deep threat and their offense actually got better. The assumption that it is a good idea to cling to yesterday's hero rather than take a chance and try to make a better team in 3 or 4 years down the road is understood. I simply don't agree that it is either the absolute "only move" nor even the best move.

 

How does anyone even know what someone will offer for Evans if their stance is that they can't possibly make any deals involving him because, by damn, we might do worse than 4-12 next year without him? If one can't even hold the thought in their head, they can't possibly consider it from different perspectives.

 

PS: The truth is the Bills might just be worse than 4-12 with Evans.

The Stealers lost the Super Bowl. Would Holmes have been the big factor in that game if he was still a Stealer playing opposite Wallace? It is certainly possible. If the goal is to win a championship, then one could argue that the Steelers season was in fact sunk and that Holmes was a missing piece to Ben's arsenal that could have put them over the top. I personally do not believe that, but it is not illogical to think that way. When you say average players account for at least 50% of the NFL, are you talking about starters or the full 50 man roster? Backups on most teams aren't usually very good.

Edited February 16, 2011 by RealityCheck

[Sisyphean Bills]

The Stealers lost the Super Bowl. Would Holmes have been the big factor in that game if he was still a Stealer playing opposite Wallace? It is certainly possible. If the goal is to win a championship, then one could argue that the Steelers season was in fact sunk and that Holmes was a missing piece to Ben's arsenal that could have put them over the top. I personally do not believe that, but it is not illogical to think that way. When you say average players account for at least 50% of the NFL, are you talking about starters or the full 50 man roster? Backups on most teams aren't usually very good.

Sorry about that 50% thing; my bad, it was a typo. What I meant was 50% of the players are average or better by definition. What I was trying to convey is that being average is not a spectacularly high bar. In my original phrasing, I used the term "so-so" as I would even entertain the notion of, say, the top 60 or 65% of players in general as being "so-so".

 

The Bills turn in their draft cards with players, using the term loosely, like Aaron Maybin and the draft class of 2007 in which not a single pick is under contract with the team. Not one. So, maybe it is asking too much to be average?

 

PS: As far as the Steelers, I think you got my point: the Steelers actually played in the Super Bowl. They made the playoffs. They had a winning record. They were not 4-12. As The Godfather has put it for decades, "You can find receivers."

[haus]

Man all you tards dissing Lee, its just amazing. Ok trade away maybe our best player. Some of you Bills fans with that attitude deserve the loosing team we have had for so long. Lee is a Stud period and he will do great where ever you jokers have him go. Wait and see how he lights it up on another team. Just ticks me off that we have been so bad for so long that some are trying to unload one of our best players. Hes like Price was to Moulds, now we just need our Moulds and we are good. He absolutely has 5-7 solid years left.

[reddogblitz]

Man all you tards dissing Lee, its just amazing. Ok trade away maybe our best player. Some of you Bills fans with that attitude deserve the loosing team we have had for so long. Lee is a Stud period and he will do great where ever you jokers have him go. Wait and see how he lights it up on another team. Just ticks me off that we have been so bad for so long that some are trying to unload one of our best players. Hes like Price was to Moulds, now we just need our Moulds and we are good. He absolutely has 5-7 solid years left.

Amen. Lee is one of if not our best guy. Maybe the reason his production is perceived to be low is because he's had JP, Trent, Holcombe, and Captain Checkdown and now Fitz at QB. With a good QB with time to throw and some other really good receivers instead of the spares we got, he'd catch a lot more passes. I can remember many circus catches he's made over the last few years. anyone remember the one he caught off his helmet for TD a few years ago? He also made a helluva sideline catch in a game this year that was hightlight reel stuff.

 

We got enough holes as it is. let's not run off our best guy to get some younger guys who might be good someday.

 

Saying we should dump Lee is just silly and dumb as dirt.

[tonyjustbcuz]

You might be able to trade Lee Evans and Kyle Williams to Detroit for their 1st........

 

.......................................Don't taze me bro

 

 

I'm not inclined to trade Lee Evans (if it were up to me that is..), he still has skills and didn't have a very good year, but unless he lost his speed which I doubt I don't see trading away a strength. He is a leader on the team and has likely mentored the young receivers and should continue doing so.

 

As far as Kyle Williams, that would be absurd trading your hardest working and productive player! We need more guys like Kyle Williams. We do have enough marginal talent (that's funny..talent) that should either be released or traded ie: John McCargo, Ashton Yubooti, Paul Pozluzny..(his stats make him sound better than he is)etc...Donte Whitner wasn't an impact player the first half of the season and is overrated! On and On..but not Kyle Williams!